Re-,
Thanks, Moti.
If this proposal is adopted, I suggest we add this text to the ACK section:
NEW:
Acknowledgements
...
A YANG module for Ethernet Segments was first defined in the context
of the EVPN device module [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-yang].
Cheers,
Med
> -Message
Carsten & Med,
Thanks for raising this. I agree with the errata, but this will need to be
hold for doc update, because we cannot create a different revision of a YANG
module through the errata process.
Thanks,
Rob
From: iesg On Behalf Of Francesca Palombini
Sent: 05 October 2021 15:12
To:
Thanks Carsten for noticing this! I did overlook completely that bps was being
used as bytes per seconds… Thanks Med for clarifying in this document and for
opening errata https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6703 . The OPS ADs are on
it, I am sure.
Francesca
From: Carsten Bormann
Date:
Hi,
I think it's OK to manage the ES object via a separate module.
It is very same approach as in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-07 (which
expired two years ago).
Regards,
Moti
-Original Message-
From: OPSAWG On Behalf Of
Hi all,
Lada made a comment about the flexibility of the module (see below). A proposal
to address the comment is to move the ethernet segment part into a separate
module as suggested in the following PR:
https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-WG/lxnm/pull/349/files. The change is
straightforward
Thank you for you review, Lada.
>>> General comments
>>>
>>> The ietf-l2vpn-ntw module with about 400 data nodes represents an
>>> impressive amount of work. Its size, however, raises some concerns in
>>> terms of manageability. For example, if the ITU-T Y-1731 recommendation
>>> ever gets
Hi Med,
On 05. 10. 21 11:06, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
Hi Lada,
Many thanks for the careful review.
Please see inline.
Cheers,
Med
-Message d'origine-
De : Ladislav Lhotka via Datatracker
Envoyé : mardi 5 octobre 2021 10:04
À : yang-doct...@ietf.org
Cc :
Hi Lada,
Many thanks for the careful review.
Please see inline.
Cheers,
Med
> -Message d'origine-
> De : Ladislav Lhotka via Datatracker
> Envoyé : mardi 5 octobre 2021 10:04
> À : yang-doct...@ietf.org
> Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-l2nm@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org;
>
Hi all,
I support adopting this document.
Some of the comments raised back in 05/2021 are still pending. I'm reiterating
them here, fwiw:
==
(1)
OLD:
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
}
NEW
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
reference
Reviewer: Ladislav Lhotka
Review result: Ready with Issues
General comments
The ietf-l2vpn-ntw module with about 400 data nodes represents an impressive
amount of work. Its size, however, raises some concerns in terms of
manageability. For example, if the ITU-T Y-1731 recommendation ever
Hi Med,
> I confirm that what I meant is "bits per second" to align with rfc8299#6.12.1.
Ah.
> I'm actually for more explicit units similar to what we are using in another
> active spec:
As long as there is this confusion in YANG units, that is the only way that
makes sense.
One little
Hi Carsten,
I confirm that what I meant is "bits per second" to align with rfc8299#6.12.1.
I'm actually for more explicit units similar to what we are using in another
active spec:
==
enum bit-ps {
value 2;
description
"Bits per Second (bit/s).";
}
12 matches
Mail list logo
