Folks I have not seen any response to my email below. Does this mean that my comments will be incorporated into the next version of draft-ietf-ospf-yang?
Regards Alan From: Alan Davey Sent: 15 December 2015 16:23 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts Folks I have a doubt about draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03. Please let me know your thoughts on the following. The text is OSPFv2-specific in places. I think that it would be better to define separate top-level groupings and containers for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 and define common groupings and containers, where possible, that are used by both. For example, grouping interface-operation contains the following, which is incorrect for OSPFv3. - leaf dr with type ipv4-address - leaf bdr with type ipv4-address. I think that it would be better to define something along the following lines. - ospfv3-interface-operation { o uses interface-config o uses ospf-common-interface-operation o leaf dr { ? type if:interface-ref ? description: * "The remote interface ID used by the Designated Router on * this link. This is the interface index of the interface local to the DR."; o etc - ospfv2-interface-operation { o uses interface-config o uses ospf-common-interface-operation o leaf dr { ? type inet:ipv4-address; ? description "Designated Router (DR) IP address."; o etc. Regards Alan Davey
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
