Thank you for this valuable comment. Indeed, I agree, it is appropriate to concentrate on the specific functionality of the device.
Another question to the group members is related to the use cases examples. In the document( internet draft) we may provide more use cases of the network services inside of the ucpe. Would it be appropriate? One more question regarding the definition of the uCPE. Do we need to add something specific to the definition of ucpe? Maybe it would be nice to define the requirements for the uCPE as a platform? Best regards, Dmytro. Get BlueMail for Android On Sep 24, 2019, 00:51, at 00:51, "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >On Sep 23, 2019, at 16:18, Dmytro Shytyi ><[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >Hello, >Thank you for comment. > >Speaking now as a contributor. > > >I have few questions to the group members. (This model should be >considered as one that is located in the orchestrator.) >Your comments will allow to improve this yang model. >1. First question related to the mgmnt IP address. >Would it be appropriate to add to the model the part related to the >ipv4/IPv6 config of ucpe for example activation of DHCP/SLAAC/static? > >Seems to me that should be left to other models like the system model >(just like you would leave NETCONF configuration to the netconf-server >model). I think your focus is on the embedded network functions on >this appliance. > >2. Should the yang model include tacacs client config ? Ntp? Syslog? > >I would say no for the same reason as above. There are other models >for that. > >3. Or it would be better if it would concentrate on the network service >management in the ucpe as it currently is?(KISS way) > >Focus on what this appliance does differently from other things would >be my individual advice. > >Joe > > >Best regards, >Dmytro. > >Get BlueMail for Android<http://www.bluemail.me/r?b=15656> >On Sep 23, 2019, at 15:40, "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" ><[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >On Sep 22, 2019, at 16:08, Dmytro Shytyi < >[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >Hello, > >This draft-shytyi-opsawg-vysm-00 describes a YANG model for uCPE >management and defines a uCPE equipment. > >Is this draft appropriate here? > >Yes, I think it would be appropriate to have a discussion about this >draft in opsawg. > >You may want to do more than just post your data tracker publication >email, though. Tee up some key questions you’d like to ask the WG to >help get the conversation going. > >Joe > > > >A new version of I-D, draft-shytyi-opsawg-vysm-00.txt >has been successfully submitted by Dmytro Shytyi and posted to the >IETF repository. > >Name: draft-shytyi-opsawg-vysm >Revision: 00 >Title: A YANG Module for uCPE management. >Document date: 2019-09-21 >Group: Individual Submission >Pages: 14 >URL: >https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-shytyi-opsawg-vysm-00.txt >Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-shytyi-opsawg-vysm/ >Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shytyi-opsawg-vysm-00 >Htmlized: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-shytyi-opsawg-vysm > > >Abstract: >This document provides a YANG data model for uCPE management (VYSM) >and definition of the uCPE equipment. The YANG Service Model serves >as a base framework for managing an universal Customer-Premises >Equipment (uCPE) subsystem. The model can be used by a Network >Service Orchestrator. > >______________ >Dmytro SHYTYI > > >_______________________________________________ >OPSAWG mailing list >[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
