Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09.txt> (Traffic Engineering Common YANG Types) to Proposed Standard
Tarek Saad <tsaad@juniper.net> Fri, 05 July 2019 16:35 UTC
Return-Path: <tsaad@juniper.net>
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 939D6120071; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 09:35:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 t3aD550hVVxJ; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 09:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 958B412006E; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 09:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108161.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x65GWqu4022687; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 09:35:39 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=tH3l6gThymVrX1dVQOpmgdLZpz58aJkEuprp5qAMyFI=; b=LuKdxnGx3+DgqKAY6sLwoIHHzTHfUxfTcPSerK4uePmjkhcpyN2FvsNE4JrFzhYiAlFu FqWQnmwxouJPZqaz8RX+e5QZNHiTh2gyFjXoML6Nx663rsBvE06vyDEzxwO5PXKeiQyD nhhi2uOkGLmIh+yfaPLapptRpbfzzP8tDIPjOPFd4/+pPenBF6eTP2E7gbCGA/iWbPKJ D0ZgUQ0w6ZabsyVs8+19DLNkYAFIkO5/0oAluBz+f7O7H5BeDWFsguBlzNncWMhcsHsp 0xPdpjhthFqq8v2N5AZOKwfzdEEuvGS+bNRYTO7g5RMGrAnwMecyzX1x77ooTYbvIjjV Yw==
Received: from nam05-dm3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm3nam05lp2050.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.49.50]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2tj3hk0nen-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 05 Jul 2019 09:35:38 -0700
Received: from BYAPR05MB4341.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.135.202.29) by BYAPR05MB6293.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (20.178.51.78) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2052.15; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 16:35:36 +0000
Received: from BYAPR05MB4341.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b1f7:984:312c:6689]) by BYAPR05MB4341.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b1f7:984:312c:6689%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2073.004; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 16:35:36 +0000
From: Tarek Saad <tsaad@juniper.net>
To: tom petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>
CC: "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ccamp-layer1-types@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-layer1-types@ietf.org>, "teas-chairs@ietf.org" <teas-chairs@ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09.txt> (Traffic Engineering Common YANG Types) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: AQHVITYDbdIAH+mi2UGL51LY4hpro6a8GdyA
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 16:35:36 +0000
Message-ID: <F2011E43-4C5B-469B-AEF0-60B441BAC3CF@juniper.net>
References: <01c101d52135$6791f660$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
In-Reply-To: <01c101d52135$6791f660$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.1a.0.190609
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b1511198-cfde-4a98-bb7d-08d70166cf0e
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(4618075)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:BYAPR05MB6293;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR05MB6293:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 4
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR05MB62931CF85A9D61CFC1519EE6B7F50@BYAPR05MB6293.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:3826;
x-forefront-prvs: 008960E8EC
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4636009)(376002)(136003)(366004)(346002)(39860400002)(396003)(199004)(189003)(53824002)(13464003)(58126008)(486006)(316002)(6246003)(81156014)(81166006)(305945005)(71190400001)(6486002)(296002)(229853002)(14444005)(476003)(8676002)(8936002)(53936002)(186003)(5660300002)(256004)(2616005)(54906003)(478600001)(4326008)(7736002)(68736007)(11346002)(99286004)(966005)(14454004)(5024004)(446003)(33656002)(36756003)(71200400001)(6436002)(102836004)(6506007)(26005)(53546011)(25786009)(86362001)(3846002)(66066001)(6512007)(6116002)(2906002)(66556008)(66476007)(66946007)(73956011)(64756008)(66446008)(76116006)(6306002)(6916009)(76176011)(111480200001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR05MB6293; H:BYAPR05MB4341.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: fo/c2GcNzk9xcsAXg7MBMZxVhonL6CCEekJU7ibo8+Acyllg3B7lQgR88aHw87bwE7KF/0q20O+dYTaCFN0P3Z3pA6azaxRi5W0lrh4ddxqTC5ucSxsgSQUu7QuY0PeTCHfTuozT3lZPlCyl80A6g2JZueFX5Z1CpVDOMbOqbsnKr7b7sXrSTC3K1HNyPUucPJDz7KpadXztLmJJ+wnY45JygAYBHi75Gms5j6U02CusaBsWo/l7cD6TwU0Ce4wxpR0Hss0QtIwhTMYqvl7h6/y5guanlO3q45u4F3xijhH4aDzr/Io7tBsrbmRREvin8bQBsH4jXE3+ZIxWxzP6SyjlK/ySP4J8KccqjZKj39WEEDWWTeVqTYtF7rMXcDyotWM/L7k7IYyxLtof+bNcIL6XMhqwhCnp3mQ3vTsJDfM=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <C5234775749F0B42BFCF066975DE55CC@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b1511198-cfde-4a98-bb7d-08d70166cf0e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 05 Jul 2019 16:35:36.6806 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: tsaad@juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR05MB6293
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-07-05_06:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1907050202
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/BU9AAB-uDwEZgt0N_WxU_7eyTG4>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09.txt> (Traffic Engineering Common YANG Types) to Proposed Standard
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, 05 Jul 2019 16:35:50 -0000
Hi tom/all, The authors of ID. draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types discussed this further and decided to remove duplication from it (including the ODU identities). Those identities will be kept defined in draft-ietf-ccamp-layer1-types. We've posted a new revision-10 for this and diffs are at: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-10.txt Regards, Tarek On 6/12/19, 11:46 AM, "tom petch" <ietfa@btconnect.com> wrote: And now it would appear we have quadruplicate definitions with the advent of draft-ietf-ccamp-layer1-types which has a comprehensive, and different, set of ODU (upper case) types. Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "t.petch" <ietfa@btconnect.com> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2019 4:43 PM > Tarek > > You asked about my reference to definitions in triplicate which my later > response did not expand on. > > The three I was counting were this I-D, exisiting IANA registries (some > of > which are identical to this I-D, some not) and the LSR I-D > draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg > which contains definitions of switching capability which I see > overlapping a part of this I-D. I thought I saw an e-mail from > Stephane, > around Christmas, saying he would discuss this with other chairs but > cannot now find it so perhaps the wish was father to the thought. > > The LSR I-D is now in AD review on the LSR list and so may get more > attention. > > Tom Petch > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tarek Saad" <tsaad.net@gmail.com> > To: "tom petch" <daedulus@btconnect.com>; <ietf@ietf.org>; "Igor > Bryskin" <Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com> > Cc: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types@ietf.org>; <teas-chairs@ietf.org>; > <teas@ietf.org>; <db3546@att.com> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 10:13 PM > Subject: Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09.txt> > (Traffic Engineering Common YANG Types) to Proposed Standard > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > Thanks for sharing your feedback. > > I'm attaching Igor's response on this topic -- which I share his same > opinion. > > Please see more comments inline from me [TS].. > > > > On 5/15/19, 7:16 AM, "Teas on behalf of tom petch" > <teas-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote: > > > > The approach taken by this I-D worries me. > > > > It provides YANG identities for a wide range of values used in TE, > such > > as encoding types and switching capabilities; so far, so good. > > [TS]: As mentioned in abstract, the module is not strictly identities. > It is a collection of re-usable YANG groupings, types and identities. > > > > These definitions were needed, and were in a large part created by > > RFC3471, in 2003. When the management of GMPLS was specified, in > MIB > > modules, these definitions were put under IANA control and they > remain > > there to this day. They were updated by e.g. RFC8330 (February > 2018) > > and RFC8363 (May 2018) so these IANA registries are not some dusty > old > > relic but a current, living specification. > > > > These YANG definitions have much in common with the IANA SMI > registries > > but they are not the same. A comparison of e.g. switching > capabilities > > suggests that this YANG module is out-of-date compared with the > IANA SMI > > registry (as with RFC8330, RFC8363) and omits several values for > no > > stated reason ( the deprecated 2,3,4, 40 PBB-TE, 151 WSON-LSC). > > [TS]: it was not the intention to be exhaustive in covering all IANA > defined entities. However, the objective was to model enough that would > make TE feature (modelled in other modules) usable and to leverage the > power of YANG augmentation for any extensions that may not be covered in > a base model. Specifically, the authors favored the use of YANG > identities over enums to allow for the extensibility of augmentation. > > > > The approach taken by other WG has been to take a IANA registry > and > > provide a parallel YANG module under common IANA control as has > been > > done for e.g. interfaces with both MIB module and YANG module > being > > updated in parallel as appropriate. > > > > Here something seems to have gone wrong. We have a parallel set > of > > definitions not acknowledging the existing ones and being > out-of-date > > compared with the existing ones. > > > > Furthermore, some of these definitions are duplicated in the work > of the > > LSR WG giving us (at least) three definitions. > > [TS]: it would help to point to the duplication or thread that this > was discussed in. However, we believe that this document covers TE data > and hence LSR module(s) would need to eliminate duplication of any TE > data (if any).. LSR module can always import TE types to use the TE > definitions. > > > > I raised this issue before Christmas 2018 and was told that the > chairs > > of TEAS and LSR would get together and get back to me. Nothing > appears > > to have changed. > > > > In passing, IANA has separate SMI registries for e.g.LSP encoding, > > Switching Types and so on, which seems a sound engineering > approach, > > allowing more flexible evolution compared to the 60-page monolith > of > > this single YANG module. > > [TS]: In this effort, we've followed similar approach to RFC8294, > RFC6021. Etc.. Do you see the same concerns there too? > > > > Regards, > > Tarek > > > > ..Tom Petch > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "The IESG" <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> > > Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2019 9:47 PM > > > > > The IESG has received a request from the Traffic Engineering > > Architecture and > > > Signaling WG (teas) to consider the following document: - > 'Traffic > > > Engineering Common YANG Types' > > > <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09.txt> as Proposed Standard > > > > > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and > solicits > > final > > > comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > > > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2019-05-16. Exceptionally, > comments may > > be > > > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > > beginning of > > > the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > > > > > Abstract > > > > > > > > > This document defines a collection of common data types and > > groupings > > > in YANG data modeling language. These derived common types > and > > > groupings are intended to be imported by modules that model > Traffic > > > Engineering (TE) configuration and state capabilities. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The file can be obtained via > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dteas-2Dyang-2Dte-2Dtypes_&d=DwIGaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=Kd6NW5ctLWr7GB646PVmMByvi8wQxPILpKhHvGQeRHY&m=MgJhvGt3mLwf8f9oWtdgerXDnDXzWE5pvU6BFj8r864&s=sTdVI3lRGKKmF89yGm2eFIv8r_KS-Dn_Ar-YQ-OtKRk&e= > > > > > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dteas-2Dyang-2Dte-2Dtypes_ballot_&d=DwIGaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=Kd6NW5ctLWr7GB646PVmMByvi8wQxPILpKhHvGQeRHY&m=MgJhvGt3mLwf8f9oWtdgerXDnDXzWE5pvU6BFj8r864&s=c4E4U0W3y8jCefYdsYmyyXDNIHRnmrJu_rteKNOqfP0&e= > > > > > > > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Teas mailing list > > Teas@ietf.org > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_teas&d=DwIGaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=Kd6NW5ctLWr7GB646PVmMByvi8wQxPILpKhHvGQeRHY&m=MgJhvGt3mLwf8f9oWtdgerXDnDXzWE5pvU6BFj8r864&s=A1Ci3lsylJh4kVbFSx9zv21ELU9q5wsSx6lJ_fCQCTQ&e= > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > -------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Teas mailing list > > Teas@ietf.org > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_teas&d=DwIGaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=Kd6NW5ctLWr7GB646PVmMByvi8wQxPILpKhHvGQeRHY&m=MgJhvGt3mLwf8f9oWtdgerXDnDXzWE5pvU6BFj8r864&s=A1Ci3lsylJh4kVbFSx9zv21ELU9q5wsSx6lJ_fCQCTQ&e= > > >
- [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-… The IESG
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… Tarek Saad
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… Tarek Saad
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT/Vimercate)
- [Teas] 答复: Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical Technology Research Dept)
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… Xufeng Liu
- [Teas] 答复: Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical Technology Research Dept)
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT/Vimercate)
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-ty… Tarek Saad