Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11.txt
Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Fri, 05 October 2018 18:31 UTC
Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 1FA42130E70 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 11:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 X1TUowSASFbO for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 11:31:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy3-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy3-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.30.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3905A130DD3 for <teas@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 11:31:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmgw10.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.9.0.10]) by gproxy3.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CED6541438 for <teas@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 12:09:23 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id 8UWkg7gU0o6eD8UX9gXoP6; Fri, 05 Oct 2018 12:09:23 -0600
X-Authority-Reason: nr=8
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5m+V9ZvAZyL+uE3R5SG8KHVbmbwi+P2LdHXkMWxrh8g=; b=fsQ24ZX0frlbR7GHQ7NSx3ZV2Z bIyjopGRendcW/e59V/jKDUbF5m/o6PI/wzO7RcyFCDtlMWxSxB9eotf6JC/cVf0xZmkQ5a6XsI1U A75d7XQNBWMzspKI9sC60DQF+;
Received: from pool-100-15-106-211.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.106.211]:35552 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1g8UWa-001Opq-LJ; Fri, 05 Oct 2018 12:08:28 -0600
To: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>, "draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang@ietf.org" <draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang@ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>
References: <153729682108.8569.6079760050660778983.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D063DF0@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com> <5d16d8f4-156f-4c6a-5832-08664417aea3@labn.net> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D064FCE@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com> <ca58cd92-e0ea-e479-fa0e-71697bd5be20@labn.net> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D066D05@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <17db4372-f15c-fc8d-601f-0e843ef7b44a@labn.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 14:08:27 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D066D05@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.106.211
X-Source-L: No
X-Exim-ID: 1g8UWa-001Opq-LJ
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-106-211.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.106.211]:35552
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 3
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Org: HG=bhcustomer;ORG=bluehost;
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/j7avoteS386hi78N28v1RAVmVH4>
Subject: Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11.txt
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: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 18:31:46 -0000
Hi Young, On 10/4/2018 10:29 AM, Leeyoung wrote: > > Hi Lou, > > I think we can do the augmentation approach. > > If we were to augment LxSM models, we have two choices: > > ·First choice: To have three separate augmented LxSM models so that > each LxSM would augment independently from one another. > > ·Second choice: To have one YANG model where three augmentations take > place there, which means all three LxSM models are augmented at the > same time. > > I would think the first choice is what you meant. > There's certainly room for identifying what is the best approach . This said, I actually don't understand the second choice and unsure if it can be legally supported (what does it mean for an implementation to support of module that includes an augmentation to a non-supported module? maybe it works with deviations?) While not sure about this, it sounds / looks like you took the first choice. Lou > Thanks. > > Young > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 6:05 PM > > To: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>; > draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang@ietf.org; teas@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for > draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11.txt > > Young, > > There was one comment on the list other than my question, right? > Giuseppe's comment basically says it is provider information, right? > So isn't this what NACM is all about, i.e., limiting information based > on who is asking for it. So I still am unconvinced that the complexity > of a new module yields any benefit. > > Just think of it from a transaction processing perspective. With the > proposed approach, a client that wants to understand the mapping has to > > (1) read the service module), (2) search the service module for a > mapping, and then (3) read the related TE information. With the > augmentation approach (2) is eliminated and during processing (1) it's > possible to see if the TE information even exists. This reduces > processing on both clients and servers. > > While not a major point, I do think the added complexity should be > more strongly justified. > > Lou > > On 9/25/2018 5:57 PM, Leeyoung wrote: > > > Hi Lou, > > > > > > I think this has been discussed in the mailing list when you asked > the opinion on this issue. Please see the attachment. > > > > > > Please also refer to the IETF 102 slides (in particular page 3) for > further information on this model and why the co-authors think it is > beneficial to have a separate model than augmenting three separate > service models. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > Young > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 3:32 PM > > > To: draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang@ietf.org; teas@ietf.org > > > Subject: Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for > > > draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11.txt > > > > > > Hi Young/authors, > > > > > > Thanks for the update. I remain a bit confused/concerned that > > > this document adds a new standalone model rather than taking the > > > simpler approach of just augmenting the existing service/connectivity > > > modules with the pointers to the TE/VN/tunnel information (perhaps > > > using > > > groupings?) > > > > > > Can you elaborate on your thinking here? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Lou > > > > > > On 9/18/2018 2:55 PM, Leeyoung wrote: > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> The revision is to fix YANG errors caused by the L1CSM YANG update. > No content changes. > > >> > > >> Thanks. > > >> Young > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] > > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2018 1:54 PM > > >> To: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>; Giuseppe > > >> Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola@telecomitalia.it>; Dhruv Dhody > > >> <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>; Jeff Tantsura <jefftant@gmail.com>; Leeyoung > > >> <leeyoung@huawei.com>; Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> > > >> Subject: New Version Notification for > > >> draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11.txt > > >> > > >> > > >> A new version of I-D, draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11.txt > > >> has been successfully submitted by Young Lee and posted to the IETF > repository. > > >> > > >> Name: draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang > > >> Revision: 11 > > >> Title: Traffic Engineering and Service > Mapping Yang Model > > >> Document date: 2018-09-18 > > >> Group: Individual Submission > > >> Pages: 22 > > >> URL: > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11.txt > > >> Status: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang/ > > >> Htmlized: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11 > > >> Htmlized: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang > > >> Diff: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-11 > > >> > > >> Abstract: > > >> This document provides a YANG data model to map customer service > > >> models (e.g., the L3VPM Service Model) to Traffic Engineering (TE) > > >> models (e.g., the TE Tunnel or the Abstraction and Control of > > >> Traffic Engineered Networks Virtual Network model). This model is > > >> referred to as TE Service Mapping Model and is applicable to the > > >> operator's need for seamless control and management of their VPN > > >> services with TE tunnel support. > > >> > > >> The model is principally used to allow monitoring and > diagnostics of > > >> the management systems to show how the service requests are mapped > > >> onto underlying network resource and TE models. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at > tools.ietf.org. > > >> > > >> The IETF Secretariat > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Teas mailing list > > >> Teas@ietf.org > > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Teas mailing list > > > Teas@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Teas mailing list > > > Teas@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas > > > > _______________________________________________ > Teas mailing list > Teas@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
- [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft-lee… Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft… Lou Berger
- Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft… Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft… Lou Berger
- Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft… Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft… Lou Berger
- Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft… Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft… Adrian Farrel