Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2016-02-01 Thread Einar Nilsen-Nygaard (einarnn)
It's a pity we can't identify a common module for packet fields. Having two separate yang modules in this area seems like a usability issue for developers as they will need to look at both modules at different times. Are there specific reasons why we can't converge on a common module defining

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2016-01-22 Thread Lisa (Yi) Huang
On 1/22/16, 4:40 AM, "netmod on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: > > >On 1/22/16, 12:56 AM, "netmod on behalf of Ebben Aries" > wrote: > >> >>On 01/21/2016 12:45 AM, Qin Wu wrote:

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2016-01-22 Thread Mahesh Jethanandani
> On Jan 22, 2016, at 12:46 PM, Lisa (Yi) Huang wrote: > > > > On 1/22/16, 4:40 AM, "netmod on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" > on behalf of > a...@cisco.com > wrote: > >> >> >> On

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2016-01-22 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
On 1/22/16, 12:56 AM, "netmod on behalf of Ebben Aries" wrote: > >On 01/21/2016 12:45 AM, Qin Wu wrote: >> 1. This draft defines two module, one is IETF-PACKET-FIELDS, the other >>is ietf-access-control-list module, >> I am wondering

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2016-01-21 Thread Ebben Aries
On 01/21/2016 12:45 AM, Qin Wu wrote: > 1. This draft defines two module, one is IETF-PACKET-FIELDS, the other is > ietf-access-control-list module, > I am wondering whether ietf-packet-fields module can be defined in more > generic way that can be applied to other modules defined somewhere

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2016-01-21 Thread Dean Bogdanovic
> On Jan 21, 2016, at 9:56 PM, Ebben Aries wrote: > > > On 01/21/2016 12:45 AM, Qin Wu wrote: >> 1. This draft defines two module, one is IETF-PACKET-FIELDS, the other is >> ietf-access-control-list module, >> I am wondering whether ietf-packet-fields module can be defined

[netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2016-01-20 Thread Qin Wu
Hi, all: Sorry for late response to this call. I have taken some time today to re-read the latest version of draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06 and have two comments: 1. This draft defines two module, one is IETF-PACKET-FIELDS, the other is ietf-access-control-list module, I am wondering whether

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2015-12-18 Thread Einar Nilsen-Nygaard (einarnn)
I have been involved in some discussions within Cisco relating to our contributions to this draft, and I can say that we did not spend much time discussing such an addition within Cisco. I am not sure what discussions the ACL model design team may have had as a group. However, I think the

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2015-12-17 Thread Nadeau Thomas
Do you mean an ASCII DNS name (versus an IP address w a mask)? —Tom > On Dec 17, 2015:8:38 AM, at 8:38 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Please forgive the newbie question, but I would like to understand > whether the group has considered an ACL type

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2015-12-17 Thread Eliot Lear
Hi everyone, Please forgive the newbie question, but I would like to understand whether the group has considered an ACL type that matches against a host name. Eliot On 12/9/15 5:27 PM, Nadeau Thomas wrote: > This email initiates a NETMOD WG Last call for >

[netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

2015-12-09 Thread Nadeau Thomas
This email initiates a NETMOD WG Last call for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06. Please review the draft and make any comments to the list by Wednesday, 16 December, 2015 by 8AM EST. Tom and Kent (as NETMOD Co-chairs) ___ netmod