Lada: Whew! I thought I was losing my mind/hearing. Thank you for your note confirming our discussion that it was a non-intersecting relationship draft you were mentioning.
Suggestions about how we should appropriately indicate RIB-Info should augment draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-17 are gratefully accepted by this WG chair. Sue -----Original Message----- From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 5:43 PM To: Susan Hares Cc: Jürgen Schönwälder; [email protected] Subject: Re: [i2rs] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-i2rs-rib-data-model-02 ( Hi Sue, > On 26 Mar 2015, at 16:09, Susan Hares <[email protected]> wrote: > > Juergen: > > Thank you for this excellent question, and for your patience in waiting for > a response. Due to travel, the Design Team requested time to discuss > their response. I also wanted to talk to Lada. The Design Team did > not think the modules conflicted. > > My brief conversation with Lada suggests that the I2RS RIB Model and the > draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-17 did not conflict. I hope that you will Yes, I said the I2RS RIB *information* model is compatible with routing-cfg, and that’s certainly true. > provide information if you think the two yang modules conflict. They cannot be in conflict because they don’t intersect. > > In your review, will you remember the key question I asked the WG > which is > > "Does this yang module encode the RIB Information Model the I2RS WG > has already adopted.” No, ietf-routing now barely defines anything besides the basic hierarchy, everything else is expected to be added via augments, and I believe you can do it now, even before the ephemeral state issue is resolved. Lada > > Sue > > -----Original Message----- > From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Juergen > Schoenwaelder > Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:51 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [i2rs] WG Adoption call for > draft-wang-i2rs-rib-data-model-02 ( > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 07:46:47PM +0100, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: >> Hi, >> >> can someone explain how the model described here relates to the >> routing model described in the core routing configuration data model? >> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-17 >> >> Any major differences or conflicts one should be aware of? >> > > I am still waiting for a response to this question. > > /js > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
