Re: [Teas] Fwd: IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo

Hi Lou,

We have had quite a bit of  private discussions between the co-anthers, and I believe, we provided a summary to the WG.
In our opinion it is a very simple, straightforward, yet quite useful addition. It was brought  to our attention by the model implementers that for a given topological element (e.g. TE link) there could be more than one instance of the same source of where the information has come from. For example, there could be more  than one instance of OSPF-TE protocol running in the network, and it is useful for the client application to understand which instance discovered/provided information for which TE links.  Before the change the model could only indicate the type of the information source (OSPF-TE protocol), but not its specific instance, hence the addition of the instance leaf.

Regards,
Igor (and co-authors)

From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2019 2:53 PM
To: Xufeng Liu
Cc: TEAS WG; draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Teas] Fwd: IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo

Xufeng,

    Can you (or other authors) discuss the motivations/issue addressed by the information-source-instance?-- Perhaps I missed it, but I believe  this was a change made without WG discussion.

Thank you,

Lou
On 3/8/2019 2:25 PM, Xufeng Liu wrote:
Hi Lou,

The change summary has been posted to the WG mailing list (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/sQ2wMTXYXwniUujt29fysqHwwpI). Please advise if the authors need to do anything further.
Thanks,
- Xufeng

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 4:21 PM Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net<mailto:lberger@labn.net>> wrote:

All,

    The recent versions of the te-topology doc had sufficiently significant technical changes that our AD and I, with input from the authors, agreed that the document should come back to the WG and to rerun a full last call process.  The key changes in rev -19 were:

- Referencing the te-types document and updates to point to its module

- introduction of information-source-instance

The second change is a technical change resulting from implementation experience, so is a good change, but as it is a substantive technical change the document has to come out of the RFC editor queue to accept it.
Authors,
    Can you send out a message summarizing all changes.

We will then restart the WG LC process.

Thank you,
Lou (as Shepherd/co-chair)

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:

IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo

Date:

Wed, 06 Mar 2019 10:49:31 -0800

From:

IETF Secretariat <ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org><mailto:ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org>

To:

lberger@labn.net<mailto:lberger@labn.net>, teas-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:teas-chairs@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo@ietf.org>

The IETF WG state of draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo has been changed to "WG
Document" from "Submitted to IESG for Publication" by Deborah Brungard:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo/

_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
Teas@ietf.org<mailto:Teas@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas