Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

> On Sep 5, 2023, at 16:25, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > > Acee, > > >> On Sep 5, 2023, at 12:42 PM, Acee Lindem wrote: >> >> What I’d thought about for this requirement is an optional read-only leaf >> containing the hex representation of only the unknown bits. This would be >> simpler to

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Acee, > On Sep 5, 2023, at 12:42 PM, Acee Lindem wrote: > > What I’d thought about for this requirement is an optional read-only leaf > containing the hex representation of only the unknown bits. This would be > simpler to model and would be fully backward compatible. > > For example: > >

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

What I’d thought about for this requirement is an optional read-only leaf containing the hex representation of only the unknown bits. This would be simpler to model and would be fully backward compatible. For example: leaf unknown-flags { type yang:hex-string;

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 02:28:02PM +, Italo Busi wrote: > > In order to keep the semantics, it is possible to prefix the name of the YANG > leaf carrying the hex-dump of the reserved field with the RFC number where > the reserved field is defined (e.g., rfcxxx-foo). > Several decades ago,

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Italo, > On Sep 5, 2023, at 10:28 AM, Italo Busi wrote: > Thinking further, you are right that hex-dumping a field works well only when > the "the semantics of the field were always clear: bits, but some are > unassigned/reserved" > > IMHO, if you are interested to diagnose also RESERVED

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

lo > -Original Message- > From: Jeffrey Haas > Sent: giovedì 31 agosto 2023 22:01 > To: Italo Busi > Cc: Rob Wilton (rwilton) ; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02 > > Italo, > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 a

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

6:15 > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) > Cc: Italo Busi ; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02 > > Rob, > > Rewinding to the points raised in the original discussion thread: > > > > On Aug 21, 2023, at 9:40 AM,

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

case you mention about the need for NBC change to the "raw" representation: could you please provide an example? Thanks, Italo From: Jeffrey Haas Sent: lunedì 21 agosto 2023 16:15 To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) Cc: Italo Busi ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Thank you everyone that participated in the poll. Based on the results, there isn’t sufficient support to adopt the draft at this time. Kent and Lou > On Aug 3, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > NETMOD WG, > > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: >

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Jan, > On Aug 22, 2023, at 4:07 AM, Jan Lindblad wrote: > The recommendation I would give for modeling bit fields with reserved bits is > to not model them as the YANG bits type. I think I've unfortunately caused this thread to fork in a non-productive fashion. The unknown-bits proposal

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Jeff, WG, The recommendation I would give for modeling bit fields with reserved bits is to not model them as the YANG bits type. Even if, on the protocol level of whatever it is that we are managing, some uint16 is divided up into three well defined bit fields and have another few bits

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Rob, Rewinding to the points raised in the original discussion thread: > On Aug 21, 2023, at 9:40 AM, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > Specifically, sometimes/always just reporting the raw hex value alongside the > bits value seems like a simple, effective, and robust solution, and perhaps > we

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02 Italo, On Aug 8, 2023, at 8:14 PM, Italo Busi mailto:Italo.Busi=40huawei@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote: Hi Kent, I am a bit struggling about how to reply to this poll … I think that having some guidelines

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Italo, > On Aug 8, 2023, at 8:14 PM, Italo Busi > wrote: > > Hi Kent, > > I am a bit struggling about how to reply to this poll … > > I think that having some guidelines about how to deal with unknown bits when > reporting information received from a protocol is quite useful. In other >

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

not support the solution described in the I-D My 2 cents Italo From: Kent Watsen Sent: giovedì 3 agosto 2023 11:03 To: netmod@ietf.org Subject: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02 NETMOD WG, This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

From: netmod on behalf of Kent Watsen Sent: 03 August 2023 19:02 NETMOD WG, This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits/02 There is no known IPR on this draft (IPR

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

I don’t support adoption as I think this solution to the problem of receiving unknown bits is excessive and the fact that it is Non-Backward Compatible (NBC) change to remove the unknown bits once they are defined. Rather, just add an optional read-only unknown-foo-bits leaf of type

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

I support adoption. Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 3, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > NETMOD WG, > > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits/02 > > There is no known IPR on this draft (IPR call). > > Please

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Support this work! > On Aug 3, 2023, at 11:02 AM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > NETMOD WG, > > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits/02 > > > There is no

[netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

NETMOD WG, This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits/02 There is no known IPR on this draft (IPR call ). Please voice your support or technical