Rob/Scott,
Thank you for getting the documents to this point. Your last comment is
completely correct. At this point the plan is to get the shepherd
write-up done and then submit the documents to the IESG for
publication. There is still time for comment as the documents will go
through IETF LC.
WG,
Please take a final look and see if you have any comments on the LC
related updates.
Thank you,
Lou (as co-chair/shepherd)
On 3/11/2025 8:56 AM, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote:
Hi NETMOD WG,
Scott and I think that we have finished updating these two drafts
based on WGLC comments. I.e., we are finally done, we hope!
The diff for draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model is pretty
minor/boring, but is here:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-11&url2=draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-13&difftype=--html
<https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-11&url2=draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-13&difftype=--html>
The diff for draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang is here:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-14&url2=draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-15&difftype=--html
<https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-14&url2=draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-15&difftype=--html>
The second draft has a few more significant changes (increasing the
doc size by 8 pages), that I would like to draw the WG’s attention to:
(1) in-discard-overflows has moved so that it augments all interfaces,
rather than being restricted to Ethernet interfaces.
(2) As requested, I have defined a set of Ethernet ingress/egress
histogram counters (i.e., measuring the number of packets based on
their length). IEEE 802.3 effectively only really recognises frames
up about 1518/1522 bytes, but often hardware supports Jumbo frames, up
to around 8/9K. Hence, I’ve defined counters that match those
previously defined by the RMON MIB but extended them with a few extra
buckets to account for larger frames (e.g., 1519-to-2047,
2048-to-4095, 4096-to-8191, 8192-to-max. Not all hardware will
support these initially, but deviations and extra vendor defined
counters can be used for those cases, and hopefully, over time, newer
hardware will align to support these definitions directly.
(3) I’ve removed the sub-interface and ethSubInterface identities that
were intended to abstract over the IANA if:types for augmented data
nodes, but the solution didn’t really work helpfully as it is
defined. This might still be worth trying to fix in future but would
need to be done as a set of base identities that the IANA types derive
from rather than the other way around. I.e., a bigger item of work
beyond the scope of this draft, so if we want to progress this idea,
this would be best done in an entirely separate draft.
I’m fairly sure that the chairs would like these drafts to be done and
handed off to the AD, so please take a look and comment back to the
list if you have any issues with the approach taken on either of these
changes.
Kind regards,
Rob
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- netmod@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to netmod-le...@ietf.org
