Jason and I spoke on this issue and the question is Do we want to add time range directly to the standard model or create a separate model for time range that can be then applied to other different nodes? If we decide to keep it as is, then the ask is to if-feature time range.
If there will not be any replies on the mailing list, this will be one question for discussion at the WG mtg Dean > On Oct 28, 2015, at 2:13 PM, Sterne, Jason (Jason) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > This comment is still applicable to the recent version 5 draft. > > Any other opinions about this ? Just wanted to bring it up again a little > before IETF94 since this draft is on the agenda. > > Regards, > Jason > > From: Sterne, Jason (Jason) > Sent: Friday, October 02, 2015 16:08 > To: Sterne, Jason (Jason); [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-03: remove time-range and put > input-interface behind an if-feature > > (splitting point (A) out of the “RE: [netmod] A few other misc. comments on > draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-03” thread) > > Hi all, > > I’d propose we remove time-range from the model for a number of reasons: > 1) I don’t think we should build individual time-range functions all > over the place in individual modules (likely in slightly different ways). If > we want time-range type functions then I think we should define that in a > more generic way that can apply to any configuration items and keep it out of > individual modules. > 2) Maybe time range functions are more appropriate up in the > client/controller layer anyways > 3) This is not standard base functionality that is uniformly supported > in devices that use ACLs > > The remaining meta-data item (input-interface) should probably also be > removed (same reason #3 as above). At minimum it should an if-feature. > > Regards, > Jason > > From: netmod [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Sterne, Jason (Jason) > Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2015 13:43 > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [netmod] A few other misc. comments on draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-03 > > Hi all, > > I brought up ACL types and ACE numerical IDs in other separate email threads. > This one is for a set of other misc. comments (one functional, the rest are > more editorial). > > A) Please make the metadata optional with an if-feature (or make each of > input-interface & time-range their own if-features – that is probably > better). Or drop those out of the model and leave them to augmentations. > If we do keep input-interface in the model as an if-feature then: > - should we import ietf-interfaces with just the prefix"if" ? That is the > prefix in the ietf-interfaces module and what is used in the routing model > for example. > - shouldn’t the input-interface be a leafref (e.g. if:interface-ref) ? > > [>>JTS] …snip… > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
