[Teas] Re: [OPS-DIR]Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang-26

[Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mahesh,

On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 9:47 PM Mahesh Jethanandani <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi Dhruv,
>
> On Jun 7, 2024, at 2:57 AM, Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
>
>> >From this sentence, it seems that LTP refers to the LTP in the native TE
>> topology, because in YANG, PE is defined as the PE node in the native TE
>> Topology. While in the YANG model and the Examples in B.1. VN JSON, it
>> looks
>> like "ltp" is the LTP within the abstract node, correct? If so, could the
>> YANG
>> path be modified to a relative path of the abstract node?
>>
>>
> Dhruv: Since the 'te-node-id' is not a key, it is not possible to change
> to relative path like "path
> "/nw:networks/nw:network/nw:node[tet:te-node-id=current()/../abstract-node]/
> nt:termination-point/tet:te-tp-id";"
> Instead I will update the description.
>
>
> I am not able to understand this comment. I understand that you cannot
> provide a path like you mention above, but at the same time, Wubo does make
> a good point. Which LTP is being referred to? The one in the underlying
> layer or in the abstract layer?
>
>
Dhruv: To handle this comment from Bo, I updated the description of this
leaf to explicitly say abstract-node.

           leaf ltp {
             type leafref {
               path "/nw:networks/nw:network/nw:node/"
                  + "nt:termination-point/tet:te-tp-id";
             }
             description
               "A reference to Link Termination Point (LTP) in the
                abstract-node.";
             reference
               "RFC 8795: YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering (TE)
                Topologies";
           }

Is there anything else that I should be doing?

Thanks!
Dhruv


>
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> [e-mail]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>