My comment on control plane vs data plane is very much in line with this comment. And Don has begun some of the discussion I was hoping to talk a bit more about in Thursday's TEAS interim. (At least the TE aspects, as well as the possible formal representation of control plane separately from data plane.)
Lou On 12/16/2014 12:18 PM, Fedyk, Don wrote: > > Hi Jeff > > > > My point was the Yang Model for L3 (as presented) seemed to outline > L3, Service and Optical and missed L2 totally. (Not saying this is > one document but one architecture as presented). Then the L2 > Presentation had some L2 but missed several L2 capabilities. (VPLS, > EVPN, VXLAN, PBB etc.) > > > > If you look at this more generically each layer (l3,l2,l1) has: > > Data path, Tunneling/Multiplexor/Virtual network, Topology, Topology > data base, TE extensions, Control Plane > > Each layer can and may use IS-IS or OSPF (and even BGP) for some > address distribution VPN information, connection coordination, TE > information, within the context of an Instance/VPN. > > Each layer can and may offer a service, p2p, p2mp, mp2mp,(some type of > persistent connection or set of connections that may have their own > resiliency mechanisms) at the layer or up to a higher layer. > > > > Layers can be skipped and upper layers may be unaware of lower layers. > > HTH Cheers, > Don > > > > > > *From:*i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jeffrey Haas > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 16, 2014 11:44 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [i2rs] Draft minutes for December 16, 2014 interim > > > > Two specific callouts: > Don, please clarify which documents could use further hamornization? > > With regard to transport and subscription decoupling, this was a topic > that had received some discussion at the NYC netmod interim. It was > agreed that this was potentially useful work and while this was a > netmod interim, given the crossover of attendees with netmod vs. > netconf it was suggested that I2RS should make a proposal as to how > such a decoupled mechanism should be represented in netconf. To this > point, Alex Clemm, it may be worthwhile expanding your proposal to > contain that feature. > > Please review the minutes and please forgive some unusual typos. I > realized that Apple auto-correct was running for a while and I may > have failed to catch some of the incorrect substitutions. > > -- Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[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
