Re: [Teas] Poll on making draft-saad-teas-yang-te-02 a WG documents

Thanks Dhurv and Xian for the feedback. Yes, we (the authors) are evaluating the option to allow the reuse of the same tunnel/LSP groupings in both the device and controller YANG models. We will update the group once we've converged.

Regards,
Tarek

From: <dhruvdhody@gmail.com<mailto:dhruvdhody@gmail.com>> on behalf of Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>>
Date: Monday, September 14, 2015 at 10:25 AM
To: "Zhangxian (Xian)" <zhang.xian@huawei.com<mailto:zhang.xian@huawei.com>>
Cc: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net<mailto:lberger@labn.net>>, TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org<mailto:teas@ietf.org>>, Tarek Saad <tsaad@cisco.com<mailto:tsaad@cisco.com>>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Poll on making draft-saad-teas-yang-te-02 a WG documents

Hi All,

Support adoption! 

Thanks Xian for bringing this up, as a PCEP Yang co-author, would appreciate conclusion on this by the WG.
Also, once we move to PCE-Initiated LSP in PCEP Yang Model, the same questions will be applicable to tunnel configurations as well.

So once the adoption is out of the way, WG should make a decision regarding this.

Regards,
Dhruv

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Zhangxian (Xian) <zhang.xian@huawei.com<mailto:zhang.xian@huawei.com>> wrote:
Dear all,

    I support adopting this draft since I think it provides a good starting point for the working group to work on.

    A non-blocking but a very important comment, which I would like to see addressed in future versions: how to model the LSP-state information, which can be exposed not only from the network element, but also from a PCE server?

   There are two options on the table:

   A)   Writing generic groupings so that the TE YANG and PCEP YANG modules can both use
   B)   Following what the topology work does, where a generic LSP-state module is written and further augmented per case (and available both for the device and controller (PCE)).

  There are pros and cons with both approaches and we haven’t reached any agreement yet. I am personally in favor of the 2nd option.

Regards,
Xian

-----Original Message-----
From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Lou Berger
Sent: 2015年9月1日 23:17
To: TEAS WG
Subject: [Teas] Poll on making draft-saad-teas-yang-te-02 a WG documents

All,

This is start of a two week poll on making
draft-saad-teas-yang-te-02 a TEAS working group document. Please
send email to the list indicating “yes/support” or “no/do not support”.
If indicating no, please state your technical reservations with the
document.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like
to see addressed once the document is a WG document.

The poll ends September 15th
Thanks,
Lou (and Pavan, who is a co-author)

_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
Teas@ietf.org<mailto:Teas@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
Teas@ietf.org<mailto:Teas@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas