Dear OPSAWG chairs,
As discussed during the WG session, the authors believe the two
draft-ietf-opsawg-service-assurance drafts are ready for WGLC.
Regards, Benoit
On 3/25/2022 11:48 AM, Jean Quilbeuf wrote:
Hi Joe,
Thanks for your comments.
I updated the draft with some more details about the relation between
healt-score and health-score-weight.
I left the counter so far, but changed it to 64 bits.
Best,
Jean
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Clarke (jclarke) [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday 24 March 2022 12:42
To: Benoit Claise <[email protected]>; Jean
Quilbeuf <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Comments on draft-ietf-opsawg-service-assurance-
yang-02
On 3/24/22 08:21, Benoit Claise wrote:
Hi Joe,
On 3/24/2022 11:48 AM, Joe Clarke (jclarke) wrote:
On 3/9/22 11:13, Jean Quilbeuf wrote:
Hi Joe,
Thanks for your comments.
First, what is the purpose of assurance-graph-version? It's a 32-bit
counter that can increment when something goes in and out of maintenance
(+2). I can easily see this wrapping fir services with a lot of churn. What
is the
impact of that? Is this version number required if we have a last modified
timestamp?
The purpose of assurance-graph-version is to enable a consumer of this
module to quickly check if they have the last version. It probably makes
sense to use a larger counter. I'll modify it.
How does it do that. If I get a version of 324523457273456, how do I
know that's the latest?
MdT on-change.
Fair. But then, as a consumer, I know it's the latest because it's the update I
just got. And still, the date will be more useful...
I know I'm being difficult and bike-sheddy. It doesn't really bother me. Just
trying to make sure there's true use for it.
Joe
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
.
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
