Re: [Teas] 2nd WG Last Call: draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-34

["Sergio Belotti (Nokia)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

I'd like to bring to WG attention one comment related to an issue in github https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/129  on IPV6.
As suggested in the last comment in github https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/129#issuecomment-1805262126
I think  that this topic should be addressed in this draft and not in packet TE tunnel model. 
There is already a proposal in github to solve the issue proposing to add an optional leaf with src-ip and dst-ip . 
Adding these optional leafs into the draft would cover the scenario permitting 128-bit IPv6 address to be source and destination in TE tunnel without impacting the rest of the draft.

Thanks
Sergio

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Teas <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Italo Busi
> Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2023 6:54 PM
> To: Lou Berger <[e-mail]>; TEAS WG <[e-mail]>
> Cc: TEAS WG Chairs <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [Teas] 2nd WG Last Call: draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-34
> 
> 
> CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links
> or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Please find below my WG LC comments (mainly editorial):
> 
> 1) The draft has dependency on draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update: the normative
> reference to RFC8876 should be replaced with a normative reference to draft-
> ietf-teas-rfc8776-update
> 
> 2) The description of the secondary-reverse-path in the list of candidate-
> secondary-reverse-path should be updated as follow:
> 
> OLD
>                      description
>                        "A reference to the reverse secondary path when
>                         co-routed with the secondary path."; NEW
>                     description
>                       "A reference to the secondary reverse path that
>                        may be utilized when the containing primary
>                        reverse path is in use.";
> 
> See: https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/231
> 
> 3) The description of the secondary-reverse-path in the container secondary-
> paths should be updated as follows:
> 
> OLD
>               description
>                 "A reference to the secondary reverse path that
>                  may be utilised when the secondary path is in use."; NEW
>            description
>              "A reference to the reverse secondary path when
>              co-routed with the secondary path.";
> 
> See: https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/231
> 
> 4) The comment about the need to add support for path loss and delay
> variation metrics has not been completely addressed
> 
> My proposed resolution would be to:
> 
> a) Move path loss metric to te-packet-types (in draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update)
> b) Add path delay variation metric to te-packet-types (in draft-ietf-teas-
> rfc8776-update)
> c) Move clarification that the unit of path metric bound is interpreted in the
> context of the metric-type from this draft to draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update
> 
> OLD
>     uses te-types:common-path-constraints-attributes {
>       description
>         "The constraints applicable to the path. This includes:
>          - The path bandwidth constraint
>          - The path link protection type constraint
>          - The path setup/hold priority constraint
>          - path signaling type constraint
>          - path metric bounds constraint. The unit of path metric
>            bound is interpreted in the context of the metric-type.
>            For example for metric-type 'path-metric-loss', the bound
>            is multiples of the basic unit 0.000003% as described
>            in RFC7471 for OSPF, and RFC8570 for ISIS.
>          - path affinity constraints
>          - path SRLG constraints";
> 
>     }
> NEW
>     uses te-types:common-path-constraints-attributes;
> 
> See: https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/103
> 
> Thanks, Italo
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lou Berger <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: lunedì 16 ottobre 2023 23:41
> > To: TEAS WG <[e-mail]>
> > Cc: TEAS WG Chairs <[e-mail]>
> > Subject: [Teas] 2nd WG Last Call: draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-34
> >
> > All,
> >
> > This starts the 2nd working group last call on
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-yang-te/
> >
> > Given the size of the document and the upcoming meeting, this will be
> > an extended LC. The working group last call ends on November 3rd.
> > 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,
> > Lou (Co-Chair & doc Shepherd)
> >
> > PS Note that another IPR call is being started and will run in
> > parallel with the last call.  The last IPR call reported no IPR.
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas