My original intent here was to provide "a name" to something that aggregated all the routing-instances. Obviously as many have pointed out, giving it the name of "rib" was a bad choice.
So we have 2 choices: - Remove the top-level object in the grammar (rib) completelyŠand instead start off with routing-instance. - Rename "rib" (in the grammar) to something better :) Thanks Nitin Bahadur On 7/25/13 4:25 AM, "Acee Lindem" <[email protected]> wrote: >I agree with Joel. > >On 7/24/13 7:43 PM, "Joel M. Halpern" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>This seems a different use of the term RIB than most of the work I am >>familiar with. Even without dealing with things like protocol specific >>RIBs, and BGP's RIB-in and RIB-out, when we deal with VRFs we normally >>discuss them as using separate RIBs. This is why the terminology seems >>upside-down to me. >> >>Yours, >>Joel >> >>On 7/24/13 10:21 PM, Nitin Bahadur wrote: >>> Hi Joel, >>> >>> Maybe this can help clarify what we meant by the RIB. >>> >>> The RIB is the totality of all routing-information in a router. The >>> routing information itself can be sub-divided into multiple objects >>>called >>> routing-instances. >>> >>> Routing-instances allow us to partition the physical router into >>>domains >>> that can operate independently from one another in terms of routing and >>> forwarding. >>> >>> >>> The rest of that section describes what objects are contained in a RIB, >>> like routing tables, routes and nexthops. >>> >>> >>> HTH as a starting point. >>> Nitin Bahadur >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 7/24/13 3:19 PM, "Joel M. Halpern" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Asking for a text proposal is quite reasonable. >>>> Unfortunately, since my oncern is taht I can not understand what is >>>> meant by RIB in this definition, it is really ahrd to propose an >>>> alternative set of definitions that do what the authors wanted. >>>> >>>> Yours, >>>> Joel >>>> >>>> On 7/24/13 6:16 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: >>>>> Joel, >>>>> >>>>> I understand your concern. Do you have text to suggest to Nitin and >>>>> co-authors? >>>>> I think part of this is figuring out how to pull out the RIB bits >>>>> (routing tables) and what traffic they apply to - as well as the >>>>>policy >>>>> of how to create associated containers. Nitin's called that a >>>>>routing >>>>> instance... >>>>> >>>>> What set of objects would you create? >>>>> >>>>> I personally would like to see the info-model described in something >>>>> other than rBNF - but I view that as a piece that can happen in a >>>>>future >>>>> version. >>>>> >>>>> Alia >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Joel M. Halpern <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Looking again at this document, I have to reluctantly say taht I >>>>>do >>>>> not support adoption of this document at this time. >>>>> >>>>> The base definition of RIB is still very unclear. A RIB is some >>>>> collection of routing instances? First, this seems upside-down >>>>>to >>>>> me. A routing instance would seem to contain a RIB, not the >>>>>other >>>>> way around. Secondly, what defines, describes, or otherwise >>>>>helps >>>>> decide what set of routing instances go in the same RIB. >>>>> >>>>> If this issue were clarified, I believe the rest of the material >>>>>is >>>>> in sufficiently good shape for working group adoption. >>>>> >>>>> Yours, >>>>> Joel M. Halpern >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/24/13 5:55 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Please review draft-nitinb-i2rs-rib-info-__model-01 and >>>>>comment >>>>> on whether >>>>> it should be adopted by I2RS. Detailed technical >>>>>conversation >>>>> is also >>>>> most welcome. >>>>> >>>>> Authors: Are you aware of any IPR that applies >>>>> to draft-nitinb-i2rs-rib-info-__model-01 Is so, has this >>>>>IPR >>>>> been >>>>> disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, >>>>> 4879, 3669 >>>>> and 5378 for more details). >>>>> >>>>> This WG call for adoption will complete on August 12. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Alia >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>> i2rs mailing list >>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/__listinfo/i2rs >>>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> i2rs mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>i2rs mailing list >>[email protected] >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > > _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
