Hi Jensen, Thank you for your email and for addressing my comments.
See in-line. Regards, Dan On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 4:01 PM Jensen Zhang <jingxuan.n.zh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Sorry for the delay. Many thanks for your review. Please see our response > inline below. > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 4:00 PM Dan Romascanu via Datatracker < > nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > >> Reviewer: Dan Romascanu >> Review result: Has Nits >> >> Ready with Nits >> >> This document defines YANG data models for Operations, Administration, and >> Maintenance (OAM) & Management of ALTO. The operator can use these data >> models >> to set up an ALTO server, create, update and remove ALTO information >> resources, >> manage the access control, configure server discovery, and collect >> statistical >> data. >> >> I like this document. It is clearly written and very well structured. I >> liked >> the description of requirements, the information model corresponding to >> the >> requirements, and the extension example modules in the Appendices. These >> are >> all very useful for operators who need to understand and use the YANG >> modules. >> >> Understanding and using this document requires a good knowledge of ALTO. >> >> My review is focused on the design and data modelling issues relevant for >> operations and manageability. I did not perform a YANG review, I assume >> that >> YANG Doctors review is performed separately. >> >> This document is Ready with a couple of editorial comments. >> >> Editorial & Nits: >> >> 1. There are many more acronyms not included in Section 3 or expanded at >> first >> occurrence. Maybe the respective acronyms sections in the ALTO documents >> should >> be mentioned / referred >> > > Thanks for pointing out this issue. We have included all the acronyms that > occur in the document in Sec 3. You can check the changes in our early edit > [1]. > > [1]: > https://ietf-wg-alto.github.io/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang.html#name-acronyms-and-abbreviations > > But we are not sure if the acronyms that only occur in the YANG modules > should also be included. > I believe that the answer is yes. There is no other separate abbreviations section for the YANG modules. > > >> >> 2. In Section 5.3.1.2 >> >> > In practice, multiple ALTO servers can be deployed for scalability. >> That may require communication among different ALTO servers. >> >> The "ietf-alto" module does not contain any configuration for the >> communication between peer ALTO servers. Instead, it provides the >> configuration for how an ALTO server can be discovered by another >> ALTO server on demand (Figure 6). >> >> I understand that the communication between ALTO servers is out of scope. >> However, I do not understand how is the scalability requirement met. Is >> there / >> Will there be another YANG module to define this data model? Something >> else >> than YANG? Maybe this is described in another ALTO document that I did >> not find. >> > > The scalability requirement is not explicitly defined in this document. It > looks like a part of R1 but is not mandatory. > > And I am not quite sure what is the scalability requirement that you > mentioned here. There can be two kinds of scalability issues: > > 1. The scalability of a large number of network domains and elements. This > issue requires the deployment of multiple ALTO server instances in > different domains and communications among different ALTO servers in > different domains. WG is still discussing the related topic [2]. The > solution is not mature. So we consider it to be out of the scope of this > document. > > [2]: > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/Hpay0QShfob_3LR7ERfpIjXvGI0/ > > 2. The scalability of a large number of client connections. i.e., the load > balance issue. This may need some autoscaling or load-balancing > configuration parameters. Is this what you want to add? > I was referring to the scalability issue mentioned in the document in the sentence 'In practice, multiple ALTO servers can be deployed for scalability.'. This seems to be related to issue #1 in your answer. If the solution is considered not mature at this stage, maybe you should mention just that in the document, to explain why it is out of scope. > > Thanks, > Jensen > > >
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
