Re: [Teas] Some stray thoughts on draft-wdbsp-teas-nrp-yang was ....

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

From: Wubo (lana) <[e-mail]>
Sent: 25 August 2023 10:56

Hi Tom,
Many thanks for your review. Please see inline with [Bo Wu].

<tp>

Looks good.  The only thing that I am unsure about is congruence, how much of the topology has to be identical to count as congruent, how much can vary down to the level of node, link, termination point and may be other properties as well.

Tom Petch

Thanks,

Bo Wu



-----Original Message-----
From: tom petch <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 6:45 PM
To: Lou Berger <[e-mail]>; Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Some stray thoughts on draft-wdbsp-teas-nrp-yang was ....



mmm no it was not me that sent this prematurely, doubtless AI at work:-(

completions (I hope) below



________________________________________

From: Teas <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> on behalf of tom petch <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>

Sent: 23 August 2023 11:33



I share Joel's concern - it does seem premature with the undecided or unresolved issues relating to NRP (or whatever name emerges)

[Bo Wu] For the NPR selector , we will include the following references of the drafts to the encapsulation of SRv6 and IPv6 hop-by-hop option:

a)        draft-ietf-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn

b)        draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id



Meanwhile, I looked at the YANG



Normative references are required for

6991 -

8294 -

8519 -

8776 -

draft-bestbar-teas-yang-topology-filter



[Bo Wu] Thanks. Will add.



and for whatever contains srv6-types which is not a module I can find in IANA

[Bo Wu] The reference of draft-ietf-spring-srv6-yang will be added.



'This draft defines ...'

perhaps 'document'

[Bo Wu] Will update.



The document title is sometimes spelt as a plural but more often in the singular

[Bo Wu] We will clean up the text to go with a plural.



NRP would benefit from a reference where it first appears.

[Bo Wu] OK. Will clarify this.



SLO SLE need expanding on first use

[Bo Wu] Will do per your suggestion.



        WG Web: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/teas/> is out of date twice

[Bo Wu] Will fix.



         "RFC XXX: A YANG Data Model for Network Resource Partition"; perhaps

         "RFC XXXX: A YANG Data Model for Network Resource Partitions";

[Bo Wu] Thanks. Fixed.



             leaf maximum-bandwidth {

what are the units?

[Bo Wu] Will change to units "bits/second".



         presence "indicates NRP IGP congruent"; I think that congruence needs defining.  If two triangles are congruent, then I know what must be the same, what must be different.  I do not have that understanding for network topology

[Bo Wu] “igp-congruent” indicates the NRP instance use same IGP topology as the “multi-topology-id”and “flex-algo-id”specified. We will clarify this.



         units "bps";

bits or bytes?

[Bo Wu] Will change to units "bits/second".



         "Introduces new network type for NRP topology"; reminds me of a decrepit and rusty sign  on the road near me that announces a new road layout, dating from over a decade ago.

[Bo Wu] We will change to “Indicates the network type of NRP” if this is clearer.



   The following individuals, authors of

   [I-D.bestbar-teas-yang-nrp-policy] and [I-D.wd-teas-nrp-yang],

   contributed to this consolidated document:



Should that also include

draft-wd-teas-vtn-network-yang-00.txt 6jun21 22pp If only to point out another name change in the predecessors?

[Bo Wu] We hope that all the authors and contributors have been acknowledged, considering the data tracker has a history, we did not include all thel historical files.



Tom Petch

(who  will now press send)



________________________________________

From: Teas <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> on behalf of Lou Berger <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>

Sent: 22 August 2023 18:02

To: Joel Halpern; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

Subject: Re: [Teas] The TEAS WG has placed draft-wdbsp-teas-nrp-yang in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"



FWIW the adoption call will start once we have all IPR declarations...



On 8/22/2023 12:57 PM, Joel Halpern wrote:

> While this mostly looks like a good start, I am concerned that

> adopting it would presume that we know what the correct representation

> for NRP identification is for the various cases (IPv6, SRv6, and

> MPLS.)  As none of those are as far as I know adopted by the

> respective working groups, it seems premature to adopt that.

>

> It seems to me that we can either adopt this with placeholders for

> identification (indicating that we will work on it later), or defer

> adoption.

>

> Yours,

>

> Joel

>

> On 8/22/2023 8:51 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote:

>> The TEAS WG has placed draft-wdbsp-teas-nrp-yang in state Candidate

>> for WG Adoption (entered by Lou Berger)

>>

>> The document is available at

>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wdbsp-teas-nrp-yang/

>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> Teas mailing list

>> [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas

> _______________________________________________

> Teas mailing list

> [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas



_______________________________________________

Teas mailing list

[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas



_______________________________________________

Teas mailing list

[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas