Re: [Teas] IETF TE Topology YANG Model Design Meeting Notes - 2016-05-23

[Leeyoung <[e-mail]>]

Hi Xufeng,

Thanks for this update. Your notes are always very helpful to understand the latest progress of this draft.

I have a few questions on the potentially adding model for labels for the connectivity matrix.


1.      You said:


               For each label
               o exclusivity (true/false)

Do you mean this bitmap?


2.      Are you aware of label restrictions applied for the connectivity matrix other than WSON? If so, then this model addition makes sense; if not, then we can add the label model for the connectivity matrix in the WSON YANG model. If the extent to which label model addition is not really a major constraint in the switching technologies other than WSON, it would be worthwhile to evaluate if we should do label restriction model in a generic way (per this draft) or do it in WSON specific way?  I am not aware of any label restriction model for the connectivity matrix for GMPLS other than WSON.


3.       If we were to extend the label model for the connectivity matrix, I would think we also need to have label restriction model for TTP LLCL as well. What do you think?


Thanks.
Young


From: Teas [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Xufeng Liu
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 9:48 AM
To: Vishnu Pavan Beeram; Igor Bryskin; Oscar Gonzalez De Dios; Tarek Saad; Himanshu Shah; Lou Berger; BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS); Susan Hares; Zafar Ali (zali); Khaddam, Mazen (CCI-Atlanta); Tony Le; BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO); Beller, Dieter (Dieter); Rajan Rao; Zhangxian (Xian); [e-mail]; Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT); Anurag Sharma
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: [Teas] IETF TE Topology YANG Model Design Meeting Notes - 2016-05-23

Participants:
Igor, Xufeng, Pavan, Dieter, Sergio, Himanshu

- Information sources
  > Discussed two use cases related to information sources:
    1) Provider applies policies to pick the most preferred.
    2) Provider does not apply policies and the decision is done by customer.
  > The model currently supports 1) well, but is not clear on 2).
  > Agreed to clarify the model by:
    1) Change "alt-information-sources" to "information-sources" to
       include all sources, including the selected one.
    2) For use case 1), the applied attribute has the selected value, and
       "information-sources" list all available sources.
       For use case 2), the applied attribute does not have value, and
       "information-sources" list all available sources.

- Connectivity Matrix
  > Discussed the comment from Cyril "to add a Label (Following
    RFC7579) restrictions".
  > Participants agreed that such constraint information is useful.
  > Participants agreed that such constraint information is generic
    enough to be used in various layers and use cases, including optical
    OTN, and abstract network topologies.
  > Participants agreed to send the suggestion TEAS WG to add such
    information to te-topology model.
  > The potential model change can be:
    For each connectivity-matrix entry, add:
      list of labels
        list types
               o inclusive-list
               o exclusive-list
               o inclusive-range
               o exclusive-range
               For each label
               o exclusivity (true/false)

Working members: please provide any comments.

Thanks,

- Xufeng

Note: Please drop me an email if you need an invite for joining the weekly call.

PS. Meeting on May 30 will be canceled for US holiday.