Re: [Teas] Status update on draft-ietf-teas-yang-l3-te-topo

Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 24 February 2021 17:00 UTC

Return-Path: <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5335A3A180B for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:00:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w63FQ_5sy7_N for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:00:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x530.google.com (mail-ed1-x530.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::530]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08B953A180A for <teas@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 08:59:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x530.google.com with SMTP id h25so3439312eds.4 for <teas@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 08:59:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=XhlIH0ANTxDHgNMjRW6aAFI431pRMsc7V/iByEL6kGk=; b=dSdTayVIBXOgXiR2xvQ9LcND4SSwHY2GCyi95sF0EYsxiDju0bDWA1c5MgfGebDRdV tSqh5aMcbnysQZc1QhSIYGyqEI/ZhIuGrm4l8FRxRUr/ttAqdFTjDsXpOGX3VTXbiUp0 oH7MylouYP3bC8lt7/L//X3kVYMJQQPjYj4X0p3Awv+iuq+BCRspt5+sN5U4RL2NJibC tkftwwiLpIoy4EY/pV8a6kGi73EChvguFHY2pTiQ6BFAtL893xXHItezv5+bqTZ5/pMb OQMWuqkYmIL4wq216ZWmcg45i7i2zZnxCds7ru2CwH0UoPoQhsDOpc+HokDbohROjSGZ dd5w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=XhlIH0ANTxDHgNMjRW6aAFI431pRMsc7V/iByEL6kGk=; b=PFqLoqpffuw6zOdzpSf67wIWDE2KKDi500fWSHoau4RH/FlwizxM2fjoXo5o/OtoTu em2oySx03F6wbiURmnY3UXMFFBdP8gddLZ/P9u3k7YbiKHJR7IrQkaIVthnD5aHLKx6z mvKgNbD8bSuq6LoiS7YbT93zqTOzgQmhJiQIG2peyRHBv/CSczDffsZaPVI9xryoUGBQ BmPdM9EuybELpvThVqT07vFsr1UvI1zCYBoiZK5kDa5iHqbIiSYaASFMwnnjL4qs1NYe BSlhP0dH/6OCp9324J91GV6VtSnHtKqrryVL7OD+Lz/SshDY9aqWhf2p7srPolOqKojK qrgQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530x5s2oOZaawTMVdTzAY0U3SfOretQdFXpPspys5+iyZtsrvUWS hB7BL9sroIrO0CNlzWy9pUgOtd2SE9E2pJ9jBhski/UTljnqSw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyLxVRIowCTA0WykPnZ3E4JUlb2Y7+MhYudH1ltztYWBQ8yjlT0X+g7HWEpRUF0MVp/w5Uhul65EwlFjpJ55+A=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:26d0:: with SMTP id x16mr6187853edd.52.1614185998352; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 08:59:58 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAEz6PPTKK-MFUyUAKBW1+2sBry2=ov9TXHCF8mL6hZ_1fXCo+g@mail.gmail.com> <AM6PR07MB5784CE62D84CBAF454870097A2FB0@AM6PR07MB5784.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM6PR07MB5784CE62D84CBAF454870097A2FB0@AM6PR07MB5784.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 11:59:47 -0500
Message-ID: <CAEz6PPQPiGGsfEwMJ8OJhfzup1p6K7zjkB7UUKRes92W7ww6YA@mail.gmail.com>
To: tom petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>
Cc: TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000884a905bc17f7cf"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/4gLCEezJofoLxiuKJTokPZiLZyY>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Status update on draft-ietf-teas-yang-l3-te-topo
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 17:00:02 -0000

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your further review. We have posted updated
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-teas-yang-l3-te-topo-10, trying to
address the new comments.

Best,
- Xufeng

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 7:37 AM tom petch <ietfa@btconnect.com> wrote:

> From: Teas <teas-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Xufeng Liu <
> xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
> Sent: 13 November 2020 01:06
>
> Current Status:
>
>   *  Received further valuable comments from Tom Petch.
>   *  Plan to post an updated version next week to address some review
> comments from Tom.
>
> <tp>
>
> Thanks for that; clearer but I will take a while to get my mind around it.
>
> On prefix, I think that l3tet is absolutely right (there are those who
> think that anything remotely te should  be texyz - not me)
> I would take it one stage further and use l3-tet for topology type since
> it is a l3 te topology!
>
[Xufeng]: While the discussions are still on-going on the other threads,
I’ll wait a bit longer for that result.

>
> The references to te-topo and te-types need updating to the RFC - I do not
> know if there are technical changes, those I-D did so many somersaults that
> I lost track.
>
[Xufeng]: Updated.

>
> Your e-mail addresses in this I-D do match!
>
> Since the IETF has abolished pagination, a bugbear of mine, then it
> behoves us to try and keep sections short.  I wonder if s.4.2 would be
> better split so that each augment is a separate section with perhaps a line
> or two of text saying e.g.
> This augments the te link attributes with statistics and configuration
> when the network type is packet
> I do not think that that subtracts from legibility and does ease
> references thereto
>
[Xufeng]: Did some kind of splits.

>
> Appendix B is more of a challenge to divide into sections!
>
[Xufeng]: Don’t know how to achieve it yet, leaving it as it for now.

>
> Tom Petch
>
> Open Issues:
>
>   *  Authors working on addressing Tom’s comments.
>
> Next Steps:
>
>   *  Follow-up with Tom and resolve comments.
>   *  Welcome further reviews and suggestions.
>   *  Keep coordinating with ietf-eth-te-topology and ietf-te-mpls-tp-topo
> to ensure aligned model relations.
>   *  Working Group Last Call after completing the above.
>
> Thanks,
> - Xufeng
>
>