Re: [Teas] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-18

Italo Busi <Italo.Busi@huawei.com> Fri, 22 July 2022 14:43 UTC

Return-Path: <Italo.Busi@huawei.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 6AD41C188715; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:43:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.209 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QHHzwGK2H3gv; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D499DC188714; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml709-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.226]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4LqBt51cVBz67M7g; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 22:39:57 +0800 (CST)
Received: from fraeml715-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.34) by fraeml709-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 16:43:29 +0200
Received: from fraeml715-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.206.15.34]) by fraeml715-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.206.15.34]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.024; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 16:43:29 +0200
From: Italo Busi <Italo.Busi@huawei.com>
To: t petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>, Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>, TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
CC: TEAS WG Chairs <teas-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Teas] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-18
Thread-Index: AQHYhJdkEiIuRAdUrUSQm9dyPMfh7q2Kob2A
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 14:43:29 +0000
Message-ID: <40d432a103984def83aff9f05a8b106b@huawei.com>
References: <CA+YzgTthabrS5jga0ANoTxxxyLsx-9ixHg6jQocL_pkbrmbiig@mail.gmail.com> <CA+YzgTuQRkQiTbsKi4W25+E6R-Y9h0EYjV_Lhw7TL3YwnP_47Q@mail.gmail.com> <62B05736.3060608@btconnect.com>
In-Reply-To: <62B05736.3060608@btconnect.com>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.203.246.111]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_40d432a103984def83aff9f05a8b106bhuaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/YtDtAfZiZ22S9NcOWV80WGfPN2A>
Subject: Re: [Teas] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-18
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 22 Jul 2022 14:43:34 -0000

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your review and comments.
See in line below our replies.
We have fixed most of the comments in github , see PR #111<https://github.com/rvilalta/ietf-te-path-computation/pull/111>

Thanks
Sergio and Italo (on behalf of other authors/contributors)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: t petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>
> Sent: lunedì 20 giugno 2022 13:17
> To: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>; TEAS WG
> <teas@ietf.org>
> Cc: TEAS WG Chairs <teas-chairs@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Teas] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-18
>
> On 16/06/2022 13:48, Vishnu Pavan Beeram wrote:
> > We are extending the last call to June 24th to allow for a few more reviews.
> >
>
> The examples should use documentation IP addresses and not 10/8.
>

IBSB> Agree: to be fixed in issue #108<https://github.com/rvilalta/ietf-te-path-computation/issues/108> (aligning the changes to the IP address within the TE tunnel draft)

> The YANG module has a lot of 'must'.  Should they be MUST with a suitable
> reference to the BCP at the start of the module?  I expect that an AD will raise
> this:-(
>

IBSB> Ok, fixed

> I note the wide use of i.e. and e.g. which makes me think the authors are
> comfortable with those abbreviations but I wonder about the two 'e.g.' in the
> YANG  module 'requested-info' and 'requested-state'.  Are they really e.g.?  No
> need to change if they are.
>

IBSB> They are really "e.g.". The 'requested-info' can be metrics but also srlg or affinities. The 'requested-state' can be the expiration timer but also the transaction-id.

> 'requested-info' is a bit awkward. 'information' singular, 'metrics'
> plural', 'is' singular.  Perhaps
> 'This grouping defines the information that is requested (e.g. metrics)
>

IBSB> Ok, fixed

> 'returning path srlgs'
> probably worth expanding srlg here in the YANG module
>

IBSB> Ok, fixed

> 'if also the tunnel name is reported'
> perhaps
> 'if the tunnel name is also reported'
>

IBSB> Ok, fixed

> What is the difference between
> request-id uint32
> and
> request-id-number uint32
> Seems confusing?
>

IBSB> Ok, fixed to use only request-id

> In a number of places, thie I-D says that it contains RPC but it does not!  It
> augments the RPC in yang-te which I think a distinction worth making e.g. with
> 'This document provides a mechanism to [request path computation etc] by
> augmenting the RPC in RFC YYYY'
>

IBSB> Ok, fixed

> Tom Petch
>
>
> > -Pavan and Lou
> >
> > On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 11:14 PM Vishnu Pavan Beeram
> > <mailto:vishnupavan@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> All,
> >>
> >> This starts working group last call on
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computatio
> >> n/
> >>
> >> Given the size of the document, this will be an extended LC (3
> >> weeks). The working group last call ends on June 14th.
> >> Please send your comments to the working group mailing list.
> >>
> >> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it
> >> is ready for publication", are welcome!
> >> This is useful and important, even from authors.
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >> Pavan and Lou
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Teas mailing list
> > mailto:Teas@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
> >
>
>