For reference, the OpenConfig variant of modeling for these nodes
https://github.com/openconfig/public/blob/master/release/models/interfaces/openconfig-if-ethernet-ext.yang
module: openconfig-interfaces
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw oc-eth:ethernet
+--ro oc-eth:state
+--ro oc-eth:counters
+--ro oc-eth-ext:in-distribution
+--ro oc-eth-ext:in-frames-64-octets?
oc-yang:counter64
+--ro oc-eth-ext:in-frames-65-127-octets?
oc-yang:counter64
+--ro oc-eth-ext:in-frames-128-255-octets?
oc-yang:counter64
+--ro oc-eth-ext:in-frames-256-511-octets?
oc-yang:counter64
+--ro oc-eth-ext:in-frames-512-1023-octets?
oc-yang:counter64
+--ro oc-eth-ext:in-frames-1024-1518-octets?
oc-yang:counter64
On 2024-09-23 18:59:18, Joey Boyd wrote:
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>
>
> All,
>
> Apologies for the repeat email. This should be a Last Call comment.
>
> The management specification for ONUs, ITU-T G.988 (OMCI), defines a managed
> entity for Ethernet Extended PM in clause 9.3.34. A subset of those counters
> includes the following:
>
> Frames 64 octets: The total number of received frames (including bad frames)
> that were 64 octets long, excluding framing bits, but including FCS. (R)
> (mandatory) (8 bytes)
> Frames 65 to 127 octets: The total number of received frames (including bad
> frames) that were 65..127 octets long, excluding framing bits but including
> FCS. (R) (mandatory) (8 bytes)
> Frames 128 to 255 octets: The total number of frames (including bad frames)
> received that were 128..255 octets long, excluding framing bits but including
> FCS. (R) (mandatory) (8 bytes)
> Frames 256 to 511 octets: The total number of frames (including bad frames)
> received that were 256..511 octets long, excluding framing bits but including
> FCS. (R) (mandatory) (8 bytes)
> Frames 512 to 1023 octets: The total number of frames (including bad frames)
> received that were 512..1023 octets long, excluding framing bits but
> including FCS. (R) (mandatory) (8 bytes)
> Frames 1024 to 1518 octets: The total number of frames (including bad frames)
> received that were 1024..1518 octets long, excluding framing bits but
> including FCS. (R) (mandatory) (8 bytes)
>
> These were taken from the histogram counters in the RMON-MIB.
>
> etherStatsPkts64Octets Counter32,
> etherStatsPkts65to127Octets Counter32,
> etherStatsPkts128to255Octets Counter32,
> etherStatsPkts256to511Octets Counter32,
> etherStatsPkts512to1023Octets Counter32,
> etherStatsPkts1024to1518Octets Counter32,
>
> Looking back through the list archive, I see some discussions where IEEE
> decided to model the counters from the RMON-MIB that corresponded with
> managed objects in 802.3 while leaving the remainder of the etherStats to
> IETF. In the earlier work on the interface extension models, there were some
> discussions about adding these but, at the time, it was pushed to future work
> as to not block progress on the draft. Is there still interest in adding
> these? I know that the interface extensions models are in WGLC, so the timing
> of this question is unfortunately the same as it was before.
>
> Best regards,
> Joey
>
>
> General Business
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lou Berger <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 5:02 PM
> To: NETMOD Group <[email protected]>
> Cc: NetMod WG Chairs <[email protected]>
> Subject: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-14 AND
> draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-11
>
> All,
>
> This starts working group last call on
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G0g_d54X-XK-ctuCRk0unOqCe1WhE1x23kSzs9_dr5Jf6SufCsezSDIkZDhDWM3xBQsvt2auBvwAfO2cZiL3p0GE7rzC$
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G0g_d54X-XK-ctuCRk0unOqCe1WhE1x23kSzs9_dr5Jf6SufCsezSDIkZDhDWM3xBQsvt2auBvwAfO2cZiL3pz5PjcmS$
>
> Note: the IPR call is running in parallel with this LC as no IPR was
> previously disclosed.
>
> The working group last call ends on October 1st.
>
> Please send your comments to the working group mailing list.
>
> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready
> for publication", are welcome!
> This is useful and important, even from authors.
>
> Thank you,
> Lou (Co-Chair & doc Shepherd)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
