Re: [Teas] Issue in draft-ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-yang

Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 02 September 2021 18:43 UTC

Return-Path: <jefftant.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 7B1133A1BF8; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, 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 bQFtHXHfIn-L; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:42:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x430.google.com (mail-pf1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::430]) (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 E73BC3A1BF2; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x430.google.com with SMTP id 7so2346707pfl.10; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 11:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=utveHIMGJmXabK8wA5sApCBsW0D8ouBkk04Ulru2AI0=; b=BhLZuUT/bkvHU8TYbdV7IIs1fUrUHkKcSpMgSEuM9KDFu5BDUgCT69lVgfeAMXuTsz TVvFmc1TFVZuhvcYusdIl/84Eh9MWlGLUbc2KUAliGajF9vL+kbAuZctF+l8IJ+p3Te0 Kg8+p2W/WPOy55Q5BdCc8/9xydYAMTBg6iDcDgVNr5fexjnEueHlIjTbAXr9VdAutZ58 4TbMuTvwdeUV4xNSS0AeOTyflqLb+RNgUQPHDqU+mC5aYSo+V+x8Za3KIHXCjfbeitQk Ug3EcT+uaFGSEB9Ls+d2/ccoF5RtI30eAPtpysqsvDnmMLD975TgMuoYtfI/CGt+JjmR 2bfw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=utveHIMGJmXabK8wA5sApCBsW0D8ouBkk04Ulru2AI0=; b=sX3LS3THj43Ce5xyD62qMarwbv7sg29FU4GleKpKXdgwbrFOIMiUOVnnCwZNqKHbjx mKYhe50HubC1YlvMw47fUxieUQhEclPhZFfzVBmyO6KR8kDFAULz5F5UC+6zy3prgXj6 5rkZjb/gEuWtZ9IwD//KsyXSulLbc8fqVYQrc6ZE65RgQfgwHIaPEUhdcYWID3Wzc8j3 1wSwBZWKpdzkGR6Wv3/iBVMQEP4+YMt1trRwLQvee9vSXPJXYHvuGX8E3tzd/iph0/c+ j9vBLz7ucclvxqxagdbdIC1KOm6k/Uu4OjBqf44w0U31DOw5rKhrFBq8pspGpzNFA5mg bJfA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532C4OBBIvZf6j0EUlDspYDa87C+x34yUjXkbLHUEJHajfOVmVSm rI6OUP24p51kI7PNiqvXZnypt4FpPPw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxoDyxOY/VU2HWnNDNxCgYQRQvhVIeYP0BWpPr0NtCHdb5XHIcccjpM5LKvm20/eioG3Nia1w==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:dc03:: with SMTP id s3mr4639622pgg.88.1630608173425; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 11:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-73-63-232-212.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.63.232.212]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id fw10sm326598pjb.24.2021.09.02.11.42.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 Sep 2021 11:42:52 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:42:51 -0700
Message-Id: <D55E90AB-AB3C-40AC-8212-CDFA937C5F8E@gmail.com>
References: <9c1ed93577ca4279a217964fcdb1e4ae@huawei.com>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk, draft-ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-yang@ietf.org, TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>, Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9c1ed93577ca4279a217964fcdb1e4ae@huawei.com>
To: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18G82)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/GhagVxkervMjc1fjfBppbQuf1dA>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Issue in draft-ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-yang
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: Thu, 02 Sep 2021 18:43:01 -0000

+1

Cheers,
Jeff

> On Sep 2, 2021, at 00:14, Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Adrian, 
> 
> That is a good suggestion. Unless I hear objections I will update the I-D accordingly. 
> 
> Thanks! 
> Dhruv 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> Sent: 02 September 2021 01:51
> To: draft-ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-yang@ietf.org
> Cc: 'TEAS WG' <teas@ietf.org>
> Subject: [Teas] Issue in draft-ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-yang
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Looking at Appendix B, I see that there is an open discussion issue:
> 
>   *  Support for Calendaring and scheduling TE resources.
> 
> I think we had a similar discussion as we went through the work on PCE and RSVP-TE. The way we approached it then was to acknowledge that calendaring and scheduling is an important function for network operators, but to leave it out of the core work. We concentrated on ensuring that the core work would be extensible so that calendaring could be added at a later stage.
> 
> I suggest that we take the same approach here. That is, we add some text to say that "Scheduling is currently out of scope, although an operator could use their own scheduling mechanism on top of this YANG model. In future augmentations to this model might be designed to integrate scheduling."
> 
> Cheers,
> Adrian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> Teas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas