IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp-04

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Fri, 27 March 2020 13:05 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 F221E3A0875; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:05:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 XE9mX_1oi9ik; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs25.mail.saunalahti.fi (vs25.mail.saunalahti.fi [62.142.117.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66BD83A0883; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs25.mail.saunalahti.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vs25.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7AB920DCA; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:05:51 +0200 (EET)
Received: from gw03.mail.saunalahti.fi (gw03.mail.saunalahti.fi [195.197.172.111]) by vs25.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC50D20D8F; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:05:51 +0200 (EET)
Received: from eggert.org (unknown [62.248.255.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: eggert@elisanet.fi) by gw03.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A317820006; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:05:47 +0200 (EET)
Received: from stickers.eggert.org (stickers.eggert.org [172.24.110.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F88E6843A0; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:05:41 +0200 (EET)
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <5D2DEEC6-3ECD-4134-8E85-13710ED965F5@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_68B98875-4018-4E22-8805-1BDF9D0D12AF"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:05:40 +0200
In-Reply-To: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933031481D30@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Cc: Michael Tuexen <tuexen@fh-muenster.de>, "draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp@ietf.org" <draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp@ietf.org>, tcpm IETF list <tcpm@ietf.org>
To: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
References: <ACE60B78-42E2-4932-86EA-14921A1D05D9@fh-muenster.de> <B574AAA7-6258-4B65-908B-89338C0B4E88@eggert.org> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933031481D30@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
X-MailScanner-ID: 6F88E6843A0.A316C
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/cSfmRO_8TMMR_qY-8jTFFja-z-c>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp-04
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:05:56 -0000

On 2020-3-27, at 15:01, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com wrote:
> 
> Many YANG modules are already including TCP-specific components. Some of these are already cited in the draft. These components are defined outside tcpm, with little if not no review at all from tcpm. Re-using some of the components defined in these documents may not be straightforward.
> 
> Defining here in tcpm the groupings that can be re-used by other modules is more than appropriate. This is also to help developers of other modules.

If you replace "YANG module" with "SNMP MIB" in what you wrote, you get exactly the argument that was made for why TSV should be doing MIBs.

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email