Re: [yang-doctors] draft-ietf-isis-sr-yang and draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang

Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 14 November 2023 18:22 UTC

Return-Path: <acee.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78840C15154A; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:22:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0WHfjYO83Lhz; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:22:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x833.google.com (mail-qt1-x833.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::833]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A638EC15108A; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:22:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x833.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-41cc56255e3so37526761cf.3; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:22:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1699986142; x=1700590942; darn=ietf.org; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=EJbDuGGDWvv1sINGHx5HWO6Px1dKCggphegC/B4/cLg=; b=NG3EJfOqHRkjzUUce4F2yp2BYOVRGreJ+0FYrXXqrXqYIgYEJz9ukY4HSOeHeS9dDJ PnuWn+rWOZgK+bdbqkXZihPgrQrH5MWCpzolwJHzChneESwukjWJvVEKtBm/5fmGJ0hg a0DWrlujXYx83hzBMFPaGXAnI5eYOAoSjrVOH6p7Ilzf2H8YUsDEZYq6Zi9sUoJtESkg yUI6T4eC2UxIeySXBofHfqQ8BG+Pu2tQlHr+GTik5wkJEeH0zGtVtsjjk+8t0ZkFCu7/ 8pBRp6DqkQA/cjkXXOhMER6b+hnxa6MAQLepMmJxv3gdsiza2EVNReXIvz+hbi6ryzkO CtEg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699986142; x=1700590942; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=EJbDuGGDWvv1sINGHx5HWO6Px1dKCggphegC/B4/cLg=; b=XPbtgaObMBq2VZyHE8kTJLg0aamJGWI23E4qTmbnR4meFbRIioXhWmBnAflpYuHMJi ug68GEkVJm2I59SPKTagUP0W+fywU2YY2t0ZV/LNQ+yK2E6zI2Lq5/vKrQkG5fSKg45j E4dAd1lWMe3uw1Kwhu2oGgGXGYOLCrpBiwBzkEjpXJpOwqQCqXTmKUesy+o4iOnWhwgC UJ/lskSBHmG9Au6ho+AT5za2rNXUfTS8MMZ9hXlcYRZtRH1n8dcBWZG/b9qQq9bRQIyJ gJVAJHf7Wwio595KBzrjxqVxmB04+aibMHFGcR1lSB+YqfWYpojON/gFHFHPPqQGNFX2 twjw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy8lGxd+9Z/zQC2b9OO0SU1MLlTDyRkUNJf2IZBza7NiuCvvdcv t3VtPzWoTKztRmGpFFDvPJ0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEbJ5XswMy5RK82iCwGtMp0wVFt75Gpxly5d8euKCbLbgq0/7jihkcVmOz1yPT3zbpoDvIjaA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:15c1:b0:41c:c3ad:922d with SMTP id d1-20020a05622a15c100b0041cc3ad922dmr2726451qty.52.1699986142572; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:22:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2605:a601:91bb:5200:34a6:e2ec:62bc:86c3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d15-20020ac8544f000000b0041cf5ec8b75sm2908663qtq.96.2023.11.14.10.22.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:22:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <34A64B35-A116-4145-9FF1-B9BE832F1FE0@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BB9B06BC-EEEE-4863-8B2E-18065C9B9855"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.100.2.1.4\))
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 13:22:11 -0500
In-Reply-To: <410720176.1896450.1699982237670@mail.yahoo.com>
Cc: Lsr <lsr@ietf.org>, "Jan Lindblad (jlindbla)" <jlindbla@cisco.com>, YANG Doctors <yang-doctors@ietf.org>
To: Reshad Rahman <reshad@yahoo.com>
References: <519166882.977244.1698850736652.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <519166882.977244.1698850736652@mail.yahoo.com> <647196989.1856562.1699973710099@mail.yahoo.com> <5AB7A387-3119-4529-B82B-85ED13B84388@gmail.com> <410720176.1896450.1699982237670@mail.yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.100.2.1.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/POycBGACVIXfzSKjXTaj0JGGXyY>
Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] draft-ietf-isis-sr-yang and draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang
X-BeenThere: yang-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email list of the yang-doctors directorate <yang-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/yang-doctors>, <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/yang-doctors/>
List-Post: <mailto:yang-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors>, <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 18:22:24 -0000

Hi Reshad, 

Note that the SR encodings contain a lot of the same information but are different in the two protocols. It wouldn’t be feasible to use common groupings as it is more importation to be consistent with the data blocks that we are augmenting than the SR extensions in the other protocol. If the IGPs were exactly the same, there would only be one 😎 

> On Nov 14, 2023, at 12:17, Reshad Rahman <reshad@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Acee,
> 
> Couple of other differences (I didn't dig to see whether they are justified):
> - Naming discrepancies e.g. TLV suffix is used more in OSPF (local-blocks v/s local-blocks-tlv)

The LSDB models for RFC 9129 (OSPF) and RFC 9130 (IS-IS) are somewhat different. It is more important to be consistent with the base models than the other protocol. 


> - No global blocks in ISIS

IS-IS has global blocks. 

augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols
          /rt:control-plane-protocol/isis:isis/isis:database
          /isis:levels/isis:lsp/isis:router-capabilities:
    +--ro sr-capability
    |  +--ro sr-capability
    |  |  +--ro sr-capability-bits*   identityref
    |  +--ro global-blocks
    |     +--ro global-block* []
    |        +--ro range-size?    uint32
    |        +--ro sid-sub-tlv
    |           +--ro sid?   uint32
    +--ro sr-algorithms
    |  +--ro sr-algorithm*   uint8
    +--ro local-blocks
    |  +--ro local-block* []
    |     +--ro range-size?    uint32
    |     +--ro sid-sub-tlv
    |        +--ro sid?   uint32
    +--ro srms-preference
       +--ro preference?   uint8

> - No capabilities in OSPF

We have augmentations for capabilities. 

Refer to https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8665#name-segment-routing-capabilities

Thanks, 
Acee



> 
> Regards,
> Reshad.   
> 
> On Tuesday, November 14, 2023, 10:11:02 AM EST, Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks Reshad - are there any other notable discrepancies? 
> 
> Thanks,
> Acee
> 
> > On Nov 14, 2023, at 9:55 AM, Reshad Rahman <reshad=40yahoo.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > My suggestion is that authors of these 2 documents spend some time together to try to align the 2 documents. After that we can do YD review.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Reshad.
> > 
> > On Wednesday, November 1, 2023, 10:58:56 AM EDT, Reshad Rahman <reshad@yahoo.com <mailto:reshad@yahoo.com>> wrote: 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Background: those 2 documents have just been assigned YD review, I am reviewing OSPF and Jan is reviewing ISIS.
> > 
> > Was an effort made to keep those 2 documents aligned/in-sync where possible/desirable? My expectation is that the SR specifics would be near-identical in the 2 documents. e.g. shouldn't the capabilities for the 2 protocols be very similar.
> > Here are some differences which don't seem justified:
> > - sr-algorithm in ISIS is a uint8 and in OSPF is an identityref
> > - range-size is a uint32 in ISIS and is a uint24 in OSPF
> > 
> > 
> > augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols
> > /rt:control-plane-protocol/isis:isis/isis:database
> > /isis:levels/isis:lsp/isis:router-capabilities:
> > +--ro sr-capability
> > | +--ro sr-capability
> > | | +--ro sr-capability-bits* identityref
> > | +--ro global-blocks
> > | +--ro global-block* []
> > | +--ro range-size? uint32
> > | +--ro sid-sub-tlv
> > | +--ro sid? uint32
> > +--ro sr-algorithms
> > | +--ro sr-algorithm* uint8
> > +--ro local-blocks
> > | +--ro local-block* []
> > | +--ro range-size? uint32
> > | +--ro sid-sub-tlv
> > | +--ro sid? uint32
> > +--ro srms-preference
> > +--ro preference? uint8
> > 
> > augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols
> > /rt:control-plane-protocol/ospf:ospf/ospf:areas/ospf:area
> > /ospf:interfaces/ospf:interface/ospf:database
> > /ospf:link-scope-lsa-type/ospf:link-scope-lsas
> > /ospf:link-scope-lsa/ospf:version/ospf:ospfv2/ospf:ospfv2
> > /ospf:body/ospf:opaque/ospf:ri-opaque:
> > +--ro sr-algorithm-tlv
> > | +--ro sr-algorithm* identityref
> > +--ro sid-range-tlvs
> > | +--ro sid-range-tlv* []
> > | +--ro range-size? rt-types:uint24
> > | +--ro sid-sub-tlv
> > | +--ro sid? uint32
> > +--ro local-block-tlvs
> > | +--ro local-block-tlv* []
> > | +--ro range-size? rt-types:uint24
> > | +--ro sid-sub-tlv
> > | +--ro sid? uint32
> > +--ro srms-preference-tlv
> > +--ro preference? uint8
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Disclaimer: I don't follow LSR...
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Reshad.
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > yang-doctors mailing list
> > yang-doctors@ietf.org <mailto:yang-doctors@ietf.org>
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors
> 
>