Re: [tcpm] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-06

Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> Thu, 16 June 2022 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2433BC157B41; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 13:59:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MGKjspJxnW_w; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 13:59:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2a.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2195BC14F74D; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 13:59:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2a.google.com with SMTP id f1so2335423vsv.5; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 13:59:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=X8N5i6NdY5sJF7/U7qdTfWYHf8EzoKjb3zgV1uok/qY=; b=QGN04myuBtBoGeeOfK9BS3DD++84P374QgWQXvrBIRHaEmInyYD34Jq/t/+MOZabGP HEDqfI8bOv9XF39mkwXPRe+QOuxQTw4QOSi9bG/y3cluget6OagHqoqDvOIGTQeVPufq p25W3ctb/iQ6JAEoPk/V5CuM5lOMPkg5E6FPPuLusA7V7ctAxBW6hiRtCRpOqRC5Ro+g 2gDfce1sb2ykvf7EuEy9nRt6AyiLArwyUVPdTBnMofmkuIV+p6i4VKUWV1IQtZGAzyXF sgKowvIpy147riBcy3sr+4D9/TARDqOyOFaVhx6rJLHjlkswa17Dd+UwzwvBr1heQg2o iYEQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=X8N5i6NdY5sJF7/U7qdTfWYHf8EzoKjb3zgV1uok/qY=; b=JAEjRUd/J8LQlHdK+6X+ORjcZhVOV8xvOmlBAaFoKajIvGUWNmtqFQSlXBYKbxc3w+ nc7mlcZ67urD3v9iIMJnBzQ5NCXnMJIVN3lm0WQSVKBKcTVaYUiUnBmZN8jZ+BcrOHrj kIc0F/59pg4hwyaxJ6a2cY3xX620CQKSDv/t7e6sVk7IzQ06wX+UsSCUB4oK5GhM0gUz ZynOj/2UUVoxdRGSqmksOVMjCJ9EABOuo7eo5iuzwno/lQB13GEi35osr8ve+p4F15ap KoKbhNG/poisCOLzV8OyTqcLNTL0Xteef+gSxjn8na1sk16Li9owabUjcTaDfluqzjK9 S4lw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora9y99rouBKHrT4s60KlRg9bThHyGTmaGz8/EvLUABpLnyDIL3oS cTgLg29LnYwiKObDrPzVIzATKJOn6ub33mH8CsA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1sFZcPOp8MApxWB2v9e2dzNdPtZaHtGH24AmpR/UyIiuR/cYBdkLKdh24P/QSpgbbUJAQLn/NEmRaSqqG8r6x8=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:ef92:0:b0:34e:1c5f:40fe with SMTP id r18-20020a67ef92000000b0034e1c5f40femr3301857vsp.18.1655413186796; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 13:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <164633935530.28300.11056800436644424942@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <164633935530.28300.11056800436644424942@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 13:59:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CAM4esxRyxhTYTmav=qoJSERH+VOAjk9ZgnFv0rboeUw_rKc9rQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp.all@ietf.org, Last Call <last-call@ietf.org>, "tcpm@ietf.org Extensions" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f4a02a05e196ea10"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/BMe7DCfrN2xkp_oKMFcRnN14re4>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-06
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 20:59:52 -0000

Gyan,

Thanks for your review. The authors have finally updated the draft, but
mostly did not address your review.

It was explicitly not the intent of this effort to model every aspect of
TCP implementations. There was strong WG consensus that this would be
time-consuming and extremely unlikely to be deployed, as most TCP endpoints
don't use YANG. Instead, this document is tightly focused on BGP routers,
which do use YANG.

To include more aspects of TCP, we would want to see evidence that is
relevant to this use case.

Martin Duke
Transport AD.

On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 12:29 PM Gyan Mishra via Datatracker <
noreply@ietf.org> wrote:

> Reviewer: Gyan Mishra
> Review result: Not Ready
>
> The TCP FSM is of course the most critical component of the transport.
>
> It would be good to list all that is not included in the Yang model that
> exists
> in the TCP MIB.  Also would be helpful as to reasons why.
>
> I see mentioned that RTO is not part of the Yang model, however to be
> complete
> I think it should be included.
>
> The yang model seems to not have  all the TCP FSM states listed below:
> Closed
> Listen
> SYN RCVD
> SYN Sent
> Established
> FIN wait 1
> FIN wait 2
> Closing
> Time wait
> Close wait
> Last Ack
>
> Also the Yang model does not reference the TCP Flag bits set during state
> changes in the FSM below as well as flag combinations for example for
> establishment state you sent SYN, receive SYN/ACK, ACK
>
> URG
> ACK
> PUSH
> RESET
> SYN
> FIN
>
> I also don’t see anything in the Yang model on TCP window and window
> scaling
> and CWIN congestion control algorithm backoff.
>
> Also I don’t see any mention in the Yang model about the well known port
> range
> 0-1023 and > 1023 anonymous port range for the TCP socket to be
> established.
>
> Also mention about the TCP TCB control block.
>
> Local IP Local Port
> Remote IP Remote Port
> Interface
> Process
> State
> Local/Send window
> Remote/Receive window
> Send SQ Ack
> Send SQ Un-ack
> Send SQ Next
> Not to be sent
> Receive Next
> RTT
> Buffer pointer
>
>
>
>