Re: [RTG-DIR] Routing directorate QA review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology
Henning Rogge <henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> Tue, 17 May 2016 07:06 UTC
Return-Path: <henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B51D12D58B for <rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2016 00:06:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.327
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.327 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gwh6jhoaUmcd for <rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2016 00:06:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de (a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de [IPv6:2001:638:401:102:1aa9:5ff:fe5f:7f22]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F29C712D59D for <rtg-dir@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2016 00:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rufsun5.fkie.fraunhofer.de ([128.7.2.5] helo=mailhost.fkie.fraunhofer.de) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de>) id 1b2Z5Z-0002n3-Fp; Tue, 17 May 2016 09:06:45 +0200
Received: from mailserv2acas.fkie.fraunhofer.de ([128.7.96.54] helo=mailserv2.fkie.fraunhofer.de) by mailhost.fkie.fraunhofer.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de>) id 1b2Z5Z-0007Cx-Bu; Tue, 17 May 2016 09:06:45 +0200
Received: from [128.7.5.36] (128.7.5.36) by MAILSERV2ACAS.lorien.fkie.fgan.de (128.7.96.58) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Tue, 17 May 2016 09:06:45 +0200
To: zhang.xian@huawei.com, jonathan.hardwick@metaswitch.com, jon.hudson@gmail.com, "shares@ndzh.com >> Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com>
From: Henning Rogge <henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <573AC2F9.8050607@fkie.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 09:06:33 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms000900090208060501070001"
X-Originating-IP: [128.7.5.36]
X-Virus-Scanned: yes (ClamAV 0.98.1/21560/Tue May 17 06:56:46 2016) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de
X-Scan-Signature: 8318846d41f6f18a0ab4cdd00a4712ab
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/mZ09nRC3qNRcSzFnJ4Ji60qUSuQ>
Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Routing directorate QA review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Directorate <rtg-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 07:06:52 -0000
Hi, I have been asked to provide a review to the following document to the routing directorate mailing list. Please be aware that this is the first time I work with YANG and related drafts. Document: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-02 Reviewer: Henning Rogge Review Date: Mai 16th, 2016 Intended Status: Standards Track The data structure suggested by the draft is reasonable and would fit most Layer2 network technologies. I have a couple of points on the draft document which might be worth looking into: * The introduction in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-02 includes a link to "I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis" that links back to the draft document itself. Maybe some links in the document refer to an older name of the draft? * the "termination-point" element only contains the types "ethernet" and "legacy" (which does not contain any data like mac-address). Is this reasonable or should a few data elements moved from the "ethernet" category to the "l2-termination-point-attributes" category? * there are different types of VLAN tags be used... should there be another field ("vlan-type" ?) to announce 802.1ad QinQ usage? I think the 802.1ad tag is also sometimes also used to move VLAN over a switch that doesn't support it (unknown Ethertypes are usually just ignored), which means just knowing the VLAN-id is not enough to reach the endpoint. * the type of ethernet (100, 1000, 10000) or data-rate could be an important attribute for an ethernet termination point, not only for links. Henning Rogge -- Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut für Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Fraunhofer Straße 20, 53343 Wachtberg, Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, Fax +49 228 9435 685 mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de
- Re: [RTG-DIR] Routing directorate QA review of dr… Henning Rogge