Hi! (Aside: There is some confusing threading because this message is on the public i2nsf@ mailing list, but it originated from a private offlist discussion where additional discussion is occurring).
I would benefit from some background on how Zahed’s (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model/ballot/#draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model_zaheduzzaman-sarker) inquiry about QUIC support translates into generic hurdle placed in front of any Yang modules. My understanding of this DISCUSS point is that it is inquiring why a security data model that allows filtering/selection of network traffic (in Yang or otherwise) doesn’t include a representation for a widely used protocol (QUIC). A related issue is that of timing – the data model work started before the protocol in question existed (QUIC). This feedback (of QUIC missing) would seem to have been equally fair for a MIB, JSON, text file-based data model facing the same timing challenge. Roman From: Susan Hares <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 6:02 AM To: Roman Danyliw <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: FW: Zahed's DISCUSS on draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model Roman: This is an example of the hurdles placed in front of any Yang model. During the original creation gathering of information for the yang model, quic was not even a protocol. Cheers, Sue From: Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 5:58 AM To: Roman Danyliw Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: Zahed's DISCUSS on draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model Hi Roman, Patrick and I will think of how to support QUIC in the I2NSF Capability Data Model even though such a support of QUIC seems not to be straightforward. Thanks. Paul On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 6:42 PM Roman Danyliw <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi! I've been working on getting the ADs to clear their DISCUSSes on draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model (and not worried about COMMENTs right now). In chatting with Zahed: ** Per DISCUSS#1, he still wants to see the QUIC language her noted (per https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/LdSfbPOx4GVqL0fPP6I1rpuMANg/). That isn't in -26. ** He has confirmed that his DISCUSS#2 (on VoLTE) is resolved in -26. Thanks. ** Per DISCUSS#3, he would clear his DISCUSS on disclaimer language similar to QUIC on HTTP/3. Thanks, Roman
_______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
