Re: [Teas] te-topology yang model: relationships between te-link and te-tps for optical transport networks
Igor Bryskin <Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com> Wed, 06 July 2016 18:34 UTC
Return-Path: <Igor.Bryskin@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 E2A1B12D128 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jul 2016 11:34:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.636
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.636 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 DIJWv7QsJeH8 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jul 2016 11:34:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81F1512B04F for <teas@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jul 2016 11:34:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CNG47630; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:34:23 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DFWEML702-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.176) by lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Wed, 6 Jul 2016 19:34:20 +0100
Received: from DFWEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.178]) by dfweml702-cah.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.176]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Wed, 6 Jul 2016 11:34:08 -0700
From: Igor Bryskin <Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com>
To: Dieter Beller <Dieter.Beller@nokia.com>, Xufeng Liu <xliu@kuatrotech.com>, Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vbeeram@juniper.net>, Tarek Saad <tsaad@cisco.com>, Himanshu Shah <hshah@ciena.com>, Rajan Rao <rrao@infinera.com>, "Zhangxian (Xian)" <zhang.xian@huawei.com>, Anurag Sharma <AnSharma@infinera.com>
Thread-Topic: [Teas] te-topology yang model: relationships between te-link and te-tps for optical transport networks
Thread-Index: AQHR1sE+ZoBIMkk3KE2EB6n7aBTkiKAJ3LUAgAI8joD//6IeMA==
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:34:07 +0000
Message-ID: <0C72C38E7EBC34499E8A9E7DD007863908EEB8B5@dfweml501-mbx>
References: <VI1PR06MB14889581CB0A44A6C575ABACB1250@VI1PR06MB1488.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com> <d7dbaf19-153c-1fde-13f7-578eabfcdcf3@nokia.com> <0C72C38E7EBC34499E8A9E7DD007863908EEB64C@dfweml501-mbx> <9f8b826a-ce12-830b-a77f-6cfb36979a4d@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <9f8b826a-ce12-830b-a77f-6cfb36979a4d@nokia.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.212.253.100]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_0C72C38E7EBC34499E8A9E7DD007863908EEB8B5dfweml501mbx_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090203.577D4F30.0177, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 0c37bb1ef8e178ea26b0412c7d445f13
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/gVzBYwC9gdlxCK5ff_q1aHkjLlU>
Cc: "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS)" <db3546@att.com>, Tony Le <tonyle@juniper.net>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>, Oscar Gonzalez De Dios <oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com>, "Khaddam, Mazen (CCI-Atlanta)" <Mazen.Khaddam@cox.com>, "Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT)" <sergio.belotti@nokia.com>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Subject: Re: [Teas] te-topology yang model: relationships between te-link and te-tps for optical transport networks
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:34:33 -0000
Hi Dieter, Your understanding is correct. But it does not contradict to a bundled TE link having a single LTP. We think of LTP is a part (root) of any TE link. Igor From: Dieter Beller [mailto:Dieter.Beller@nokia.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 1:06 PM To: Igor Bryskin; Xufeng Liu; Vishnu Pavan Beeram; Tarek Saad; Himanshu Shah; Rajan Rao; Zhangxian (Xian); Anurag Sharma Cc: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS); Tony Le; teas@ietf.org; Oscar Gonzalez De Dios; Khaddam, Mazen (CCI-Atlanta); Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT); Lou Berger; Zafar Ali (zali); Susan Hares Subject: Re: [Teas] te-topology yang model: relationships between te-link and te-tps for optical transport networks Hi Igor, On 05.07.2016 16:00, Igor Bryskin wrote: Hi Dieter, Currently we model LTP per TE link, not per component link. Could you elaborate why should we do otherwise? my question is related to this part in the model: augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nt:link: +--rw te! +--rw config | +--rw (bundle-stack-level)? | | +--:(bundle) | | | +--rw bundled-links | | | +--rw bundled-link* [sequence] | | | +--rw sequence uint32 | | | +--rw src-tp-ref? -> ../../../../../../nw:node[nw:node-id = current()/../../../../../nt:source/source-node]/termination-point/tp-id | | | +--rw des-tp-ref? -> ../../../../../../nw:node[nw:node-id = current()/../../../../../nt:destination/dest-node]/termination-point/tp-id | | +--:(component) | | +--rw component-links | | +--rw component-link* [sequence] | | +--rw sequence uint32 | | +--rw src-interface-ref? string | | +--rw des-interface-ref? string | +--rw te-link-template* -> ../../../../../te/templates/link-template/name {template}? | +--rw te-link-attributes My interpretation is that a TE-link can optionally be composed of a bundle of component links like in GMPLS. Is my understanding incorrect? Thanks, Dieter Thanks, Igor From: Dieter Beller [mailto:Dieter.Beller@nokia.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2016 9:29 AM To: Xufeng Liu; Vishnu Pavan Beeram; Igor Bryskin; Tarek Saad; Himanshu Shah; Rajan Rao; Zhangxian (Xian); Anurag Sharma Cc: Oscar Gonzalez De Dios; Lou Berger; BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS); Susan Hares; Zafar Ali (zali); Khaddam, Mazen (CCI-Atlanta); Tony Le; Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT); teas@ietf.org<mailto:teas@ietf.org> Subject: te-topology yang model: relationships between te-link and te-tps for optical transport networks Hi Xufeng, all, in optical transport networks (DWDM and electrical OTN layers) we have a finite set of (C)TPs (=connection termination points) on our links. So, there is typically the following containment relationship: te-link (--> list of component links if bundling is applied - optional) --> list of te-tps (finite set of CTPs ) Looking at the latest version of our Yang model (https://github.com/ietf-mpls-yang/te/blob/master/ietf-te-topology.yang), it is not obvious how this containment relationship is modeled, which was our assumption. Our suspicion is that this relationship is not modeled at all. Could you please let us know if our understanding is correct. If so, we propose to model the above relationships in both directions: te-link (--> list of component links) --> list of te-tps te-tp (--> component link) --> te-link. Thanks, Dieter & Sergio On 02.07.2016 01:26, Xufeng Liu wrote: Participants: Igor, Xufeng, Pavan, Sergio, Mateusz, Manali, Dieter, Tarek, Oscar, Anurag - Preparing draft update > Dieter described multi-layer and transitional link. > Igor's description for inter-domain topology merging. - Model change to support inter-domain links: augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nt:link: +--rw te! +--rw config | +--rw (bundle-stack-level)? | +--rw te-link-template* leafref {template}? | +--rw te-link-attributes | +--rw schedules | | +--rw schedule* [schedule-id] | | +--rw schedule-id uint32 | | +--rw start? yang:date-and-time @@ -436,6 +439,9 @@ augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nt:link: | | +--rw schedule-duration? string | | +--rw repeat-interval? string | +--rw access-type? te-link-access-type + | +--rw external-domain + | | +--rw remote-te-node-id? te-node-id + | | +--rw remote-te-link-tp-id? te-tp-id +++ | | +--rw plug-id? uint32|string|uri <<<<< TBD | +--rw is-abstract? empty | +--rw name? string | +--rw underlay! {te-topology-hierarchy}? @@ -590,6 +596,9 @@ augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nt:link: | | +--ro schedule-duration? string | | +--ro repeat-interval? string | +--ro access-type? te-link-access-type + | +--ro external-domain + | | +--ro remote-te-node-id? te-node-id + | | +--ro remote-te-link-tp-id? te-tp-id | +--ro is-abstract? empty | +--ro name? string | +--ro underlay! {te-topology-hierarchy}? - Discussed Anurag's comments > Anurag presented transport modeling analysis slides. > Discussed access link modeling. > Anurag proposed to use URI as the type for node-id and te-link-id instead of yang:dotted-quad and uint32. > Participants debated on the attribute types and could not convince each other. > Will bring the type issue to the working group. Thanks, - Xufeng Note: Please drop me an email if you need an invite for joining the weekly call. There will be no meeting on July 4 because of US holiday. _______________________________________________ Teas mailing list Teas@ietf.org<mailto:Teas@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
- Re: [Teas] te-topology yang model: relationships … Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] te-topology yang model: relationships … Dieter Beller
- Re: [Teas] te-topology yang model: relationships … Igor Bryskin
- [Teas] te-topology yang model: relationships betw… Dieter Beller
- [Teas] IETF TE Topology YANG Model Design Meeting… Xufeng Liu