[Teas] Fwd: [Rtg-yang-coord] Aligning models across the Routing Area

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

YANG draft authors please take note and discuss proposed changes with
the WG.

Lou

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[Rtg-yang-coord] Aligning models across the Routing Area
Date: 	Wed, 23 Nov 2016 10:49:38 -0500
From: 	Lou Berger <[e-mail]>
To: 	Routing Chairs <[e-mail]>, Routing YANG Coordination
<[e-mail]>
CC: 	Routing Area YANG Architecture DT <[e-mail]>



Hi, (RTG Chairs and YANG aficionados),

    YANG continues to be a hot topic in many (of your) RTG area
groups.  Some of us in the DT thought it would be worth pointing out
some more recent publications/WG activities that may impact work in
area WGs -- and importantly, that aligning RTG Area WG's models with
these activities will help us all produce a more cohesive and
complementary body of work.

The key recent items are:

1) RFC 8022 has been published
   (A YANG Data Model for Routing Management)

   This really contains basic building blocks for our area

2) RFC6087bis has been submitted for publication
   (Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of YANG Data Model Documents)

   Notably, Section  5.23 provides some guidance on how to handle
   OpState now, while waiting for the revised data store solution.

3) YANG Schema Mount, draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount, is moving along
   in NetMod

   This is a key building block for VRFs/VSIs and Logical
   routers/switches/systems, and may provide value elsewhere too.

4) Logical Network Elements and Network Instance drafts are progressing
   in RTGWG (draft-ietf-rtgwg-lne-model, draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model)

   These are the models supporting VRFs/VSIs (NIs) and Logical
   routers/switches/systems (LNEs) *without* requiring explicit
   support in every model.

5) Finally, based on the past meeting, we should shortly have a base set
   of  "Routing Area Common YANG Data Types" defined in RTGWG (based on
   draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-routing-types)

   This defines several types that are commonly used in the rtg area,
   and use of such should help with consistency across models.

We are suggesting that aligning RTG WG's models to the above makes
sense at this time, and that each WG/set of authors review and update
their models as they see appropriate.  Of course, feedback on the
drafts mentioned above should be provided to their respective WGs.

Lou for the RTG Area YANG DT



_______________________________________________
Rtg-yang-coord mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord