[netmod] Re: Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-11

tps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis/12/. > > Thanks again for your careful review. > > Cheers, > Med > > > -Message d'origine- > > De : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET > > Envoyé : mardi 18 juin 2024 09:04 > > À : 'Xufeng Liu

[netmod] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-11

Reviewer: Xufeng Liu Review result: Ready with Nits 3.2. Code Components The “file name” after the "" tag is something described as “SHOULD” be included. If there is no such a “file name”, the tool “rfcstrip” will not extract the correct file. Should we consider making this “file nam

Re: [netmod] Long trees RE: Next steps for draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis

Hi Med and all, Sorry that I would not agree with the proposed text, especially the following: "If the complete tree diagram is too long (more than 5 pages, typically) even with groupings unexpanded (Section 2.2 of [RFC8340]), the authors SHOULD NOT include it in the document. A s

Re: [netmod] WG adoption call: draft-dbb-netmod-acl-03

Support the adoption. Thanks, - Xufeng On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 6:02 PM Lou Berger wrote: > Hello, > > This email begins a 3-week adoption poll for: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dbb-netmod-acl/ > > Please voice your support or technical objections to adoption on the > list by the end

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10

Support the adoption as a co-auther. Thanks, - Xufeng On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 5:29 PM Lou Berger wrote: > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10 > > Please voice your support or technical objections on list before the end > of

Re: [netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10

d *On Behalf Of *Igor Bryskin > *Sent:* Monday, December 7, 2020 3:02 PM > *To:* Qin Wu ; Henk Birkholz < > henk.birkh...@sit.fraunhofer.de>; Xufeng Liu ; > Benoit Claise ; Lou Berger > *Cc:* NetMod WG Chairs ; NetMod WG < > netmod@ietf.org> > *Subject:* Re: [netm

[netmod] operation with "table join" capability

During the modeling discussion within TEAS WG, we encountered the dilemma between more compact (with less or no redundant information) YANG structure and less operations. We are wondering if it is reasonable to request NETCONF/YANG to support operations with "table join" capability that is equiva

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang

Agree with Dan. The use case is valid, though the errors in the data model can be fixed. Support. Thanks, - Xufeng On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:44 AM King, Daniel wrote: > Hi All, > > > > Expressing, and delegating base imperative policy to network nodes > (regardless if it’s a switch, router, netw

Re: [netmod] IPR poll on draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang

No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft. Thanks, - Xufeng On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 11:45 AM Joel Jaeggli wrote: > Authors, Contributors, WG, > > As part of preparation for WG Adoption > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to drafts identified above? > > Please state either: >

Re: [netmod] A question on the parameter overriding in draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg

possibly even an > indication that the wording in the spec is overly restrictive. > > > On Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 10:35:11AM -0400, Xufeng Liu wrote: > >> In Section 2.3. and many other locations, the current IS-IS model > applies > >> the parameter overriding r

[netmod] A question on the parameter overriding in draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg

In Section 2.3. and many other locations, the current IS-IS model applies the parameter overriding rule as below: [Quote]: 2.3 . Per-Level Parameters Some parameters allow a per level configuration. In this case, the

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-chopps-netmod-geo-location-01

Support. - Xufeng On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 4:32 PM Kent Watsen wrote: > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chopps-netmod-geo-location-01 > > Please voice your support or objections before April 8. > > Kent // as co-chair > > >

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6991-bis-00

Support. - Xufneg On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 4:30 PM Kent Watsen wrote: > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6991-bis-00 > > Please voice your support or objections before April 8. > > Kent (and Lou and Joel) > > ___

Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis

."; } description "Availability level of the link"; } Thanks, - Xufeng On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 7:07 AM Balázs Lengyel wrote: > +1 to percentage. > > Balazs > On 2018. 11. 03. 3:44, Xufeng Liu wrote: > > Remember that some draft asked

Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis

Remember that some draft asked for a type of percentage value to the nearest hundredth. Wondering if it can be put in. Thanks, - Xufeng On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 11:39 AM tom petch wrote: > Original Message - > From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" > To: "Kent Watsen" > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, Oc

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00

support. Thanks, - Xufeng On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 2:48 PM Kent Watsen wrote: > The IETF 102 in-room poll should really good support to adopt > this draft, and no objections. > > This email starts an adoption poll for: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00 > > Please i

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll

yes/support. Thanks, - Xufeng On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:39 AM Lou Berger wrote: > All, > > This is start of a two week poll on making > draft-lengyel-netmod-yang-instance-data-04 a working group > document. Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or > "no/do not support". If indi

Re: [netmod] Adoption Poll: draft-rtgyangdt-netmod-module-tags-02

yes/support. Thanks, - Xufeng From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of joel jaeggli Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 6:47 PM To: NETMOD Working Group Subject: [netmod] Adoption Poll: draft-rtgyangdt-netmod-module-tags-02 Hi, This is the start of a *two* week poll on

Re: [netmod] WG: Adoption Poll: draft-bierman-netmod-yang-data-ext-01

Support. Thanks, - Xufeng > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 8:27 AM > To: NetMod WG ; NetMod WG Chairs cha...@ietf.org> > Subject: [netmod] WG: Adoption Poll: draft-bierman-netmod-yang-data-ext-

Re: [netmod] Augmentation to Groupings

The restrictions and scopes might be defined, hopefully. It would also be ok to add new name. Thanks, - Xufeng From: Andy Bierman [mailto:a...@yumaworks.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 3:01 PM To: Alexander Clemm Cc: Juergen Schoenwaelder ; Xufeng Liu ; NETMOD WG Subject: Re

[netmod] Augmentation to Groupings

During the discussions of TE tunnel and topology models, we have found that it is desirable to have the capability of augmenting a grouping. In our case, there are multiple technology specific models augmenting a base generic model. In the base model, some groupings are used multiple times, and ea

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07

l...@jacobs-university.de] > Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 6:34 PM > To: Xufeng Liu > Cc: 'Kent Watsen' ; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07 > > Does 'Yes/support' imply "I've reviewed this do

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07

Yes/support. Thanks, - Xufeng > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 5:38 PM > To: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07 > > All, > > This starts a two-w

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-03

yes/support. Thanks. - Xufeng On Friday, October 13, 2017, Kent Watsen wrote: > All, > > Now that we have resolved the module naming issue on the list (i.e. > that keeps the original rfc module names and updates the unwanted > legacy nodes to have status 'obsolete'), rather than wait for the >

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Retrieving Information Pointed by leafref

then the server must provide the entire body of the node pointed by the pointer, otherwise, just the pointer (as it happens today, that is, when no "joint with" list specified). We think that this would allow for the client to optimize the number of request-response iterations depending

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Retrieving Information Pointed by leafref

etconf] [netmod] Retrieving Information Pointed by leafref On 2017-10-06 23:11, Xufeng Liu wrote: > During the design team discussion for TE and MPLS YANG modeling, we have received a request from implementers: How to minimize the number of NETCONF/RESTCONF RPCs to improve operation efficiency? &g

[netmod] Retrieving Information Pointed by leafref

During the design team discussion for TE and MPLS YANG modeling, we have received a request from implementers: How to minimize the number of NETCONF/RESTCONF RPCs to improve operation efficiency? Especially for the case when the operator or client software needs to retrieve the object contents poin

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-rfc7223bis-00 (resend)

Support. Thanks, - Xufeng > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 2:30 PM > To: NetMod WG > Cc: NetMod WG Chairs > Subject: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-rfc7223bis-00 > (resend) >

Re: [netmod] Correction: WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-rfc7277bis-00

Support. Thanks, - Xufeng > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 3:48 PM > To: NetMod WG > Cc: NetMod WG Chairs > Subject: [netmod] Correction: WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod- > rfc7277bis-

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07.txt

Alternatively we can use "/top/root" as the name of the mount-point, then there won't be case for 'A module MAY contain multiple "mount-point" statements having the same argument.' The "mount-point" extension statement won't take an argument, which will be cleaner, and make the extension stateme

Re: [netmod] Proposal to enhance the YANG tree output

> -Original Message- > From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 2:37 AM > To: xufeng.liu.i...@gmail.com > Cc: a...@cisco.com; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Proposal to enhance the YANG tree output > > "

Re: [netmod] Proposal to enhance the YANG tree output

To a user of the schema-mount, it is important to be able to visualize all key elements of the mounting mechanism: mount-point, mounted schema module, and parent-reference. The details can be worked out, but if any of these elements were not useful in the presentation, it would be questionable w

Re: [netmod] two options for removing /foo-state trees?

A consequence of this discussion, I have a question about writing a model to augment RFC8022bis or RFC7223bis: The new augmentation model is NMDA compliant, but also requires immediate support for "in use" and "system created" information, as described in Sec 1.3 of the guidelines (https://tool

Re: [netmod] schema mount open issue #1

> -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 8:35 AM > To: Martin Bjorklund > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] schema mount open issue #1 > > On 08/29/2017 03:37 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > L

Re: [netmod] Potential additions to rfc6087bis: RegEx guidelines

> -Original Message- > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] > Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 8:53 AM > To: Xufeng Liu > Cc: Per Hedeland ; Ladislav Lhotka ; > 'netmod@ietf.org' > Subject: Re: [netmod] Potential

Re: [netmod] Potential additions to rfc6087bis: RegEx guidelines

> -Original Message- > From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:c...@tzi.org] > Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 2:11 PM > To: Xufeng Liu > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Potential additions to rfc6087bis: RegEx guidelines > > On Aug 23, 2017, at

Re: [netmod] Potential additions to rfc6087bis: RegEx guidelines

> -Original Message- > From: Per Hedeland [mailto:p...@tail-f.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 1:15 PM > To: Ladislav Lhotka > Cc: 'netmod@ietf.org' ; Xufeng Liu > Subject: Re: [netmod] Potential additions to rfc6087bis: RegEx guidelines > > On

[netmod] Potential additions to rfc6087bis: RegEx guidelines

Members of Routing Area Yang DT have had some discussions about the handling of various variants of regular expressions. The followings are the current state, and we are thinking that if this topic can be added to RFC6087bis: 1. Regular Expression Usage YANG uses regular expressions to restrict

Re: [netmod] Schema-mount question: Augmentation to the Mounted Module

g; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Schema-mount question: Augmentation to the Mounted > Module > > "Xufeng Liu" wrote: > > Hi Martin, > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com] > > >

Re: [netmod] Schema-mount question: Augmentation to the Mounted Module

t; > > > On 6/14/2017 7:17 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > >> Hi Xufeng, > > >> > > >> please see my answers inline. > > >> > > >> Xufeng Liu writes: > > >> > > >>> Hi Lada, > > >>> &

Re: [netmod] Clarification Question on draft-dsdt-nmda-guidelines-01

uergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 4:10 PM > To: Xufeng Liu > Cc: draft-dsdt-nmda-guideli...@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Clarification Question on draft-dsdt-nmda-guidelines-01 > > Hi, > > the typical

[netmod] Schema-mount question: Augmentation to the Mounted Module

Hi Lada, We have got two questions on how to specify the module entries in a schema: 1. Are augmentations of parent modules inherited when augmented module is listed in schema-mounts schema? For example, ietf-ospf module augments ietf-routing. When we include ietf-routing to the schem

[netmod] Clarification Question on draft-dsdt-nmda-guidelines-01

During discussing the adoption of this guidelines, a question came up w.r.t. the semantics of the non-NMDA "-state" module during the transitioning period: What kind of state do the leaves in the "-state" module represent? The applied configuration or the actually used operational data? Since on

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

yes/support. Regards, - Xufeng > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen > Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 7:23 PM > To: netmod@ietf.org > Cc: netmod-cha...@ietf.org > Subject: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree- > di

Re: [netmod] kw review of draft-liu-netmod-yang-schedule

needs to be altered. When we configure a schedule, we can now specify the target data objects. Please let us know what you think. Thanks, - Xufeng From: Andy Bierman [mailto:a...@yumaworks.com] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 12:02 PM To: Xufeng Liu Cc: Xufeng Liu ; Kent Watsen

Re: [netmod] kw review of draft-liu-netmod-yang-schedule

Hi Kent and All, Based on comments, we have submitted updated version https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-netmod-yang-schedule/ Thanks, - Xufeng From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Xufeng Liu Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 4:03 PM To: Kent Watsen

Re: [netmod] OpsState Direction Impact on Recommended IETF YANG Model Structure

The assumption of “I suspect that all the routing models will be structured similarly” is not correct. Very few models in routing area structure this way. Regards, - Xufeng From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Wilton Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 1:05 PM T

Re: [netmod] Opstate solutions discussions: update and request for WG input

For applied configuration, I'd also prefer [B], especially [4], which clarifies datastores in a better way. [4] also paves a way for better modeling of derived state. Once the approach for applied configuration is formalized, the derived state, as a part of OpState modeling, will need to be for

Re: [netmod] [Teas] Use of schema mounts for common model

We still hope that schema mount can handle cross-referencing across mounted modules. It is also needed when ietf-interfaces model is mounted to logical-network-element and network-instance models. More comments for this case below in-line. Thanks, - Xufeng > -Original Message- > From:

Re: [netmod] kw review of draft-liu-netmod-yang-schedule

Hi Kent, Thanks for the valuable comments. Best, - Xufeng From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 10:54 AM To: netmod@ietf.org Subject: [netmod] kw review of draft-liu-netmod-yang-schedule [As a contributor] While it's clear what thi

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-structural-mount-02 as draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount

Support. - Xufeng > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 12:18 PM > To: netmod WG > Cc: netmod chairs > Subject: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-structural-mount- > 02 as draft-ietf-net

Re: [netmod] proposed change to ietf-routing

state ... > -Original Message- > From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:lho...@nic.cz] > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:41 AM > To: Xufeng Liu > Cc: NETMOD WG > Subject: Re: [netmod] proposed change to ietf-routing > > > > On 26 Feb 2016, at 15:33, Xufeng L

Re: [netmod] proposed change to ietf-routing

Hi Acee and Lada, Have a question: the schema hierarchy will be different after the changes. Is the following expected? We will have ro branch and rw branch split in the middle of the tree after mounting? Before: module: ietf-routing +--ro routing-state | +--ro routing-instance* [name]

Re: [netmod] Yang mount / ysdl questions

tmod-structural-mo...@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Yang mount / ysdl questions > > Martin Bjorklund writes: > > > Hi, > > > > "Xufeng Liu" wrote: > >> While realizing that the mechanism specified in the two drafts is > >> very useful for m

[netmod] Yang mount / ysdl questions

While realizing that the mechanism specified in the two drafts is very useful for modeling, I have a few questions that are common to both approaches: -How to mount one tree (but not other trees) from a module? For example, I may want to mount interfaces to one mounting point, but inter