Hi, So sys-mac-address is supposed to be the MAC address of the mgmt port, i.e. the device would respond to an ARP request for management-address with sys-mac-address? I think use of term system might be a bit misleading if that’s the case, mgmt-mac-address might be better.
Also, it is odd to have an IP address in an L2 grouping. Disclaimer: not familiar with that draft at all, just took a look at the L2 grouping. Regards, Reshad. From: yang-doctors <[email protected]> on behalf of Susan Hares <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2020 at 11:12 AM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, 'Benjamin Kaduk' <[email protected]> Subject: [yang-doctors] draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology The following question was asked by Ben Kaduk during IESG review of the following document: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology/ grouping l2-node-attributes { [...] leaf sys-mac-address { type yang:mac-address; description "System MAC address."; } If there are more than 1 system mac address in a switch, how would this model handle it. My understanding is that most switches have 1 system mac address for network management. Therefore, the L2 topology model supports one. Question for Yang Doctors: 1) Is this the normal assumption for yang models? 2) If not, what is the normal assumption on system mac addresses? 3) Am I correct that switches with more than 1 system MAC will augment their basic yang model with the second system MAC Address. Thank you, Susan Hares
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
