[sfc] YANG model in draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit
"Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" <fbrockne@cisco.com> Thu, 28 March 2019 15:46 UTC
Return-Path: <fbrockne@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: sfc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sfc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D695B120270 for <sfc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 08:46:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=e662J16j; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=Llr4KyJR
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l-Is9IjNvSUP for <sfc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 08:46:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3321120114 for <sfc@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 08:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3574; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1553787972; x=1554997572; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=gc8aif/Npw0B+NN5RzlMDfwUdXB/lb85k9GTmKQpRFI=; b=e662J16jC8iJlWwn1W17qbfWiWyDifIb5qn5jwy4+PjTy0cpkprWf0BP n/CbhzXy5y4XpUlu+gNtv3rkn5XU8kVPjaOy3vAK+uLVSHumYlfvHqtw3 McfMMIzkww10t71vkRHj0DaUKUl0eey5gxxpiTGsUBrGXhMIhmyf0nVwy o=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:sf3M5BCA6nj1gBZB6/wCUyQJPHJ1sqjoPgMT9pssgq5PdaLm5Zn5IUjD/qs03kTRU9Dd7PRJw6rNvqbsVHZIwK7JsWtKMfkuHwQAld1QmgUhBMCfDkiuIvTwaCc5GslqX15+9Hb9Ok9QS47z
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AoAACk65xc/5JdJa1kHAEBAQQBAQcEAQGBUQcBAQsBgQ4vUANodAQLJ4dVA4RSiltKlFKESYEugSQDVA0BASyEQAKFNCI0CQ0BAQMBAQkBAwJtHAELhX4TAQE4EQEMdCYBBBuDG4ERTAMVAQKfKwKKFIIggngBAQWFBBiCDAiBLwGLMReBQD+BV4dQgzmCJop1himUEAkCk1+UDIsskzoCBAIEBQIOAQEFgU04gVZwFYMnggoMF4NLilNygSiOTQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,280,1549929600"; d="scan'208,217";a="252165683"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 28 Mar 2019 15:46:11 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (xch-rcd-013.cisco.com [173.37.102.23]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x2SFkBdJ010664 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <sfc@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:46:11 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (173.37.102.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:46:10 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:46:10 -0500
Received: from NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:46:10 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-cisco-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=hZ67BHMQQmbUg/ARloWQgIpjNncpX/YOrVzGr5hgWNk=; b=Llr4KyJR5TB1jTYj3v6aeo0mLrJlvoitUH4xDrlx0x+1Lw+dKjNOtbLINfMDzIpAIfulFyEOO5UIsoBrZofC7gjqZpSKC3eq7I3qFCcHCX7fsoL5KqLIMbWb0ys76oKFquELXBm0JOdESX8LRxF5epISySsvD+0y7zC8jlm4olw=
Received: from DM6PR11MB3625.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.230.149) by DM6PR11MB3434.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.177.220.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1750.17; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:46:10 +0000
Received: from DM6PR11MB3625.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d145:a1f4:ed34:e31b]) by DM6PR11MB3625.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d145:a1f4:ed34:e31b%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1750.014; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:46:10 +0000
From: "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" <fbrockne@cisco.com>
To: "sfc@ietf.org" <sfc@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: YANG model in draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit
Thread-Index: AdTlfGVbaIYybCEFT5GgukVsWsCqzQ==
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:46:09 +0000
Message-ID: <DM6PR11MB3625B901CD604F8A51E31CAEDA590@DM6PR11MB3625.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=fbrockne@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c0:1001::2af]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4a470662-575b-4cc4-33ea-08d6b3947fcb
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600127)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DM6PR11MB3434;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR11MB3434:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR11MB343419FF3419028EF22BD030DA590@DM6PR11MB3434.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 0990C54589
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39860400002)(366004)(136003)(376002)(396003)(346002)(199004)(189003)(52084003)(25786009)(99286004)(81156014)(1730700003)(81166006)(2351001)(8676002)(478600001)(186003)(4744005)(2501003)(106356001)(486006)(71190400001)(71200400001)(14444005)(8936002)(256004)(86362001)(790700001)(6506007)(6116002)(476003)(97736004)(6916009)(74316002)(53936002)(105586002)(2906002)(7696005)(7736002)(14454004)(68736007)(52536014)(316002)(6436002)(5640700003)(102836004)(5660300002)(46003)(6306002)(33656002)(55016002)(54896002)(9686003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM6PR11MB3434; H:DM6PR11MB3625.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: DQpZA0s6DN1lDHj6+HYvp9+6hG31Q/e8eh6Lx7EBsYdtzzAWAQTvjV0VJ9jxx2eZ94fxTV3pVVcUbMQShsS28vEn/XOhsjS4vo9yEbJJUd3fw9FvF0EsUKzG3GGmCPKBhWRdTpaaz6qAc5rLINxjGZJ6pU4gulMXMuSlrJgrlJAdQMiFUUG7xL38Ybm/0WtMAQXWeBSObgHMNdlnuh+3pwh2rfITYU9wJPDxgUmas4BOqhLoakwWCiUs3uQDt2Xm5V1EM0kAdP70uh1OgG/zFEpELHQn0egqjBfpjcCtTKHccx8YOZPCRYcPLxN2qnodylfAuFgjqHvgc+tjOR1M8YWMPaugEdfEL5rM7fXTgXmxQiGNG5kmFs2op86ybgdKniYdZqgP5kHDMhx9ltKFNWpo/atCen+P69KWCcnemEI=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM6PR11MB3625B901CD604F8A51E31CAEDA590DM6PR11MB3625namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4a470662-575b-4cc4-33ea-08d6b3947fcb
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Mar 2019 15:46:09.9348 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB3434
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.23, xch-rcd-013.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-10.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sfc/AUTK9UTQZtLqg6g6S0Vh2Ydqi5U>
Subject: [sfc] YANG model in draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit
X-BeenThere: sfc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Service Chaining <sfc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sfc>, <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sfc/>
List-Post: <mailto:sfc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc>, <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:46:15 -0000
Per the request of the SFC chairs in the SFC WG meeting as part of the discussion on draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit today: Right now, we have the YANG model for proof-of-transit documented in the draft that defines proof-of-transit, i.e. draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit-02. The document currently takes benefit from this fact, in that the mechanism definition references the YANG model for detailing e.g. value ranges. That said, we can of course farm the YANG model out into a dedicated document if so desired by the WG. Thoughts / preferences? Thanks, Frank
- [sfc] YANG model in draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-trans… Frank Brockners (fbrockne)