Re: [TICTOC] Comments on the proposed 1599v2 YANG model

Rodney Cummings <rodney.cummings@ni.com> Wed, 09 November 2016 20:39 UTC

Return-Path: <rodney.cummings@ni.com>
X-Original-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD0AF1293E0 for <tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:39:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.903 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_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nio365.onmicrosoft.com
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 A6aLX6f-5Vy0 for <tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:39:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from NAM02-BL2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2nam02on0107.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.38.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EBBF1296AE for <tictoc@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:39:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nio365.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-ni-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=Y9UPsJ8EKwEXFs5/72lfIhb9KVIs6SL0UTVb8xizCds=; b=EMm1CqH4mQ5QbsDJsl6jvHjLE2dOt8dNAlZtuenxgzlCWGLRppIjfKx+qta50Z8WAaC/eQQ4SKP7LX1FVG/TCZpPSjZLMFimbHy7xTx9RscyKuo7muMNLFbtb8NYJISsPm5xF4oY5EsThMeLevIFsui4r0vzA1N4GJDor2DpwOY=
Received: from BN1PR04MB424.namprd04.prod.outlook.com (10.141.58.153) by BN1PR04MB421.namprd04.prod.outlook.com (10.141.58.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.707.6; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 20:39:43 +0000
Received: from BN1PR04MB424.namprd04.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.6.17]) by BN1PR04MB424.namprd04.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.6.17]) with mapi id 15.01.0693.021; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 20:39:43 +0000
From: Rodney Cummings <rodney.cummings@ni.com>
To: Joseph Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>, "tictoc@ietf.org" <tictoc@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [TICTOC] Comments on the proposed 1599v2 YANG model
Thread-Index: AQHSN6bGYg6ZmDO81UurYDuaVH7x86DPSOrA
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 20:39:42 +0000
Message-ID: <BN1PR04MB42484B0E22D82221945561A92B90@BN1PR04MB424.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20161105165400283070.8dd800cd@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <20161105165400283070.8dd800cd@comcast.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rodney.cummings@ni.com;
x-originating-ip: [71.40.81.121]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ecd9b5f1-30a9-4231-46e3-08d408e0892a
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN1PR04MB421; 7:T2FBeY55yKE2efCoz2YpO+SsCcuRWb84q+3X2/jOKJVXyjpHJVmkn/cBeuq49AoUgaZIQlr8wiwjbXHW5qvuYyl4Cmky5v+6F2Papd8hNnTKla9DAhxFGl88QNqctURLQstOcUPBMzITMjDJr2q3dmx4v6xfGRimnBWyne8mTe4S/Nxdr0k9qKo4cZmJA1OLaNpPqtFELX9N7AOu9FfHbUXD4DSW4S6M0G3TLgOQY4zfeLyqfKAJTAlU0eUPkVYdKVAGc3GzEQqeJuNRWGJfcjp3C9k9HpcdNt2MMxluoMLLBeBH9oDI9DLCBTI1oaHHmpbJlR+ZkNMEYNBeKJx2joMaUvDUXmIuT/ja5VN/5Xg=
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN1PR04MB421;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN1PR04MB421247B72DE4AC560629CDD92B90@BN1PR04MB421.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040176)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BN1PR04MB421; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN1PR04MB421;
x-forefront-prvs: 0121F24F22
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(199003)(377454003)(189002)(51914003)(13464003)(99286002)(107886002)(7736002)(122556002)(102836003)(3280700002)(7846002)(106356001)(105586002)(189998001)(106116001)(3660700001)(2501003)(5890100001)(68736007)(8676002)(229853002)(87936001)(6116002)(86362001)(8666005)(54356999)(76176999)(50986999)(305945005)(3846002)(92566002)(66066001)(76576001)(97736004)(5001770100001)(2950100002)(7696004)(2900100001)(74316002)(8936002)(81156014)(81166006)(101416001)(2906002)(33656002)(586003)(5660300001)(9686002)(7059030); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN1PR04MB421; H:BN1PR04MB424.namprd04.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ni.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ni.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Nov 2016 20:39:42.9698 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 87ba1f9a-44cd-43a6-b008-6fdb45a5204e
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN1PR04MB421
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tictoc/U2qrJGNIxr_fKPhruisUwsWb-Mc>
Subject: Re: [TICTOC] Comments on the proposed 1599v2 YANG model
X-BeenThere: tictoc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Timing over IP Connection and Transfer of Clock BOF <tictoc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tictoc/>
List-Post: <mailto:tictoc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 20:39:48 -0000

Hi Joe,

Thanks for the comments... very helpful.

I'd like to discuss some high level themes for your comments.

1. Regarding comments on the leafs in the YANG module (section 3):

As stated in the Introduction (section 1): "The data model is based on the PTP data sets as specified in [IEEE1588]."

Therefore, each leaf is based on the normative specifications of clause 8 of IEEE Std 1588-2008. The name of each leaf aligns 1-1 with the equivalent name of a 1588-2008 data set member. This YANG module can not change the 1588-2008 specifications. That means that the answer to most of your questions is:
	Refer to the specifications in IEEE Std 1588-2008.
For example, IEEE Std 1588-2008 specifies the units of measure for each leaf.

That being said, the description of each leaf did make an attempt to summarize the specifications of IEEE Std 1588-2008. That methodology avoids the potential for a leaf description that is pages long. Nevertheless, the summary does have the disadvantage of assuming that the reader is familiar with IEEE Std 1588-2008 specifications.

I suppose one could argue that each description should copy the text from IEEE Std 1588-2008 for each leaf, regardless of the length of that text.

Is that what you are requesting?

2. Regarding the first comment in A.4 (starting "Where is the specific make, model,").

Again, this model and module is based on IEEE Std 1588-2008, and we explicitly avoid adding new features that are outside of that standard.

There is a feature in the future IEEE 1588 revision that provides what you request, but since that 1588 revision is a work-in-progress, it is the subject of a future revision of this model/module (see bullet at top of page 4). The authors want to avoid creating a dependency between those two projects.

3. Regarding the second comment in A.4 (starting "As for the standard compliant").

YANG supports vendor-specific data through use of augments. There is no need to provide placeholders for such data. Please refer to the YANG specifications and tutorials, and see if follow up discussion is needed.

Rodney

> -----Original Message-----
> From: TICTOC [mailto:tictoc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Gwinn
> Sent: Saturday, November 5, 2016 3:54 PM
> To: tictoc@ietf.org
> Subject: [TICTOC] Comments on the proposed 1599v2 YANG model
> 
> To the TICTOC working group:
> 
> Attached find my redlines against draft-ietf-tictoc-1588v2-yang-00
> dated 20 October 2016.
> 
> Where the arrows point should be text highlighted in yellow, but the
> yellow may be faint in some readers.
> 
> Joe Gwinn
>