[Teas] Yang Grouping for Geo-location

julien.meuric@orange.com Fri, 30 July 2021 15:32 UTC

Return-Path: <julien.meuric@orange.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACA4C3A2DB0 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:32:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.487
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.487 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, FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA=2.309, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=orange.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aakeYRmkQB6m for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (relais-inet.orange.com []) (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 44CBF3A2DAD for <teas@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfedar01.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by opfedar23.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTPS id 4GbrxL3sMBzBryl for <teas@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 17:32:22 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=orange.com; s=ORANGE001; t=1627659142; bh=uNN30ULs6CI7iAy+IrzMiiJ//C7sjvvS/jKE+EP7Yh4=; h=From:Subject:To:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=GRYI3uHND7Xy04n5/p2Yn/QOB3b2Zw7+Q49gM96h1qUQidOnG/iCDYIcdBVjX+zR0 DX2jFyoMjOKr7+ZVpEpvbv8VtLI7OIupn27sOSuZEjc9iFieolsTwbftcJPBpXCpHm WmwqZF2FvjxIR5M/ENhWzR3EaR4fdA/Mw4didBs/ZOIcf34xk+U5eDBRoByCdHI0O9 U/9luBtvQ35s6QbJ4XtdlfSbFRX+pUwpewQtHK+oDrrlg/WjEHoUGFxcFb3GrSLRe6 jvhs5oA2e/JITMPx61s/4zBkH3ylGb7JA7cOK5TqSrbbmhZ+rpAe5CRRUrSnyCjgB8 0ES7FC5sVbxtw==
Received: from Exchangemail-eme6.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.13.86]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by opfedar01.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTPS id 4GbrxL2z5GzBrLP for <teas@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 17:32:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] ( by exchange-eme6.itn.ftgroup ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.498.0; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 17:32:19 +0200
From: <julien.meuric@orange.com>
To: TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
CC: LE ROUZIC Esther TGI/OLN <esther.lerouzic@orange.com>
Organization: Orange
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 17:32:18 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Originating-IP: []
Message-ID: <710_1627659142_61041B86_710_234_1_dac58e1b-7a84-4c56-825a-93f917f3574d@OPEXCAUBMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/Au6n2JZ_5QDpXtMQpet29RpD8V4>
Subject: [Teas] Yang Grouping for Geo-location
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: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 15:32:30 -0000

Hi TEASers,

In CCAMP, we work on draft-ietf-ccamp-optical-impairment-topology-yang
and we've been relying so far on the geolocation-container from RFC
8795. Now that draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location is with the IESG, how does
the WG expect the augmentations to the TE topology to move on about
- Stick with the container from RFC 8795?
- Let each author set or WG choose?
- Deprecate the grouping from RFC 8795?
- Some other plan?

Thanks for you thoughts,

Julien, on behalf of the contributors to


Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.