Hi Jeff, Many thx for your note. As I clarified to Sue my question was really about LSR WG not IDR :)
And the trigger was Gunter's claim that his employer's OS is already sending content of LSDB over YANG. So I was a bit puzzled what happens with new extensions if they like ISIS reflection if they do not contain the YANG model from day one ? How is that data being encoded if at all ? That answer is also important to alternative to BGP-LS discussion but let's have a separate discussion on this in the coming weeks. Best, R. On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 10:28 PM Jeffrey Haas <jh...@pfrc.org> wrote: > Robert, > > > On Jun 30, 2022, at 6:56 PM, Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net> wrote: > > Isn't the YANG section a requirement for all protocol extension > documents before they are sent for publications these days ? > > > We're not yet to the point where extensions to YANG modules are part of > base IETF work, but we're probably going to need to have that discussions > soon across IETF. > > This year will see base YANG modules for a number of protocols done. I > had hoped I could contribute toward the BGP YANG module getting done closer > to start of year than not, the BGP module is more likely to be complete > this fall.[1] > > Once we have the base modules out, augmentations for them covering various > extensions will make sense. Prior to the publication of the base modules, > we wouldn't have had the documents advance due to MISREF dependencies. > > Once our base module is out, we'll have need of a number of small > augmentation modules to fill in the missing features. If you're looking to > help with that work, there's probably room to start writing some drafts > now. I think the BGP YANG module is structurally solid for most > configuration and operational state. Policy is the remaining large piece > of work. > > That said, I think we'll find trying to write YANG for BGP-LS challenging. > > The reason I am asking this is in fact in light of the other discussions > we have on IDR list where at least one mode of link state state > advertisement can be done using YANG encoding. Is YANG section optional in > LSR WG documents which define new protocol extensions and new functionality > ? If an implementation uses YANG to push LSDB how the new TLVs defined in > the draft are going to be shared across ? > > > I think your broader question about what a streaming protocol for IGP > state looks like is probably best addressed in those threads. But, as > above, it's going to be an interesting modeling exercise. > > -- Jeff > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
