Hi Reshad, Why do we need a new YANG model for clients? Why can’t they just use ietf-bfd-types.yang? I’d like to avoid the unnecessary levels of indirection. In fact, it looks wrong to me since the grouping bfd-client-ext-cfg-parms uses the grouping bfd-grouping-base-cfg-parms which only contains the enabled leaf. I believe you meant to use bfd-grouping-common-cfg-parms in the other new model. However, I don’t see any reason why client shouldn’t use this directly. Thanks, Acee
On 7/25/17, 2:33 PM, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Yingzhen, > >The grouping is available @ >https://github.com/jhaas-pfrc/ietf-bfd-yang/blob/master/src/yang/ietf-bfd- >c >lients.yang > >If you¹d like changes to the grouping, send me an email. > >Regards, >Reshad. > >On 2017-07-21, 12:22 PM, "Yingzhen Qu" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>Hi Reshad, >> >>Thanks for the summary. >> >>Both ospf and isis models will make corresponding changes when the new >>BFD grouping is available. >> >>Thanks, >>Yingzhen >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:19 AM >>To: Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]>; [email protected] >>Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] >>Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt >> >>We (BFD and OSPF YANG authors) had a discussion yesterday. >> >>The agreement is that since IGP peers are auto-discovered, we want to add >>back the basic BFD config (multiplier + intervals) in IGP via a grouping. >>BFD will provide that grouping in a specific YANG module. IGP BFD YANG >>will be in a separate module (separate from the main IGP module). >> >> >>Regards, >>Reshad. >> >>On 2017-07-05, 12:21 PM, "Rtg-bfd on behalf of Jeffrey Haas" >><[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>Thanks authors for the edits on the BFD yang module. This gets us a >>>significant step closer to alignment with the rest of IETF for network >>>instancing. >>> >>>I'd like to encourage the working group to provide feedback on this >>>issue and also the changes in the module. >>> >>>As noted in another thread, we still have to figure out how to deal >>>with accommodating interaction of the BFD yang module with client >>>protocols. >>>For >>>example, the IGPs. In particular, how do you configure the properties >>>of the BFD sessions that may be dynamically instantiated based on >>>control protocol activity? >>> >>>-- Jeff >>> >>>On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 12:55:59PM -0700, [email protected] >>>wrote: >>>> >>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>>>directories. >>>> This draft is a work item of the Bidirectional Forwarding Detection >>>>of the IETF. >>>> >>>> Title : YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding >>>>Detection (BFD) >>>> Authors : Reshad Rahman >>>> Lianshu Zheng >>>> Mahesh Jethanandani >>>> Santosh Pallagatti >>>> Greg Mirsky >>>> Filename : draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt >>>> Pages : 59 >>>> Date : 2017-06-30 >>>> >>>> Abstract: >>>> This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to >>>>configure >>>> and manage Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-yang/ >>>> >>>> There are also htmlized versions available at: >>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06 >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06 >>>> >>>> A diff from the previous version is available at: >>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06 >>>> >>>> >>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >>>>submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >>>>tools.ietf.org. >>>> >>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>> >
