Hi Warren,
Thanks for the review.
In your example below
+--ro number-of-sessions (10)
+--ro number-of-sessions-up (2)
+--ro number-of-sessions-down (5)
+--ro number-of-sessions-admin-down (3)
There is a description on Page 37 of rev-16 of the draft, I can add to it as
follows, is this sufficient?
leaf number-of-sessions {
type yang:gauge32;
description "Number of BFD sessions.";
}
leaf number-of-sessions-up {
type yang:gauge32;
description "Number of BFD sessions currently in up state (as defined
in [RFC5880]).";
}
leaf number-of-sessions-down {
type yang:gauge32;
description "Number of BFD sessions currently in down or init state (as
defined in [RFC5880]).";
}
leaf number-of-sessions-admin-down {
type yang:gauge32;
description
"Number of BFD sessions currently in admin-down state (as defined in
[RFC5880]).";
}
I will fix the nits in the next rev.
Regards,
Reshad.
On 2018-07-04, 1:17 PM, "Warren Kumari" <[email protected]> wrote:
Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bfd-yang-16: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-yang/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't panic, this should be an easy DISCUSS to clear, but I think it
important
for interoperability.
In multiple places, you have:
+--ro number-of-sessions?
+--ro number-of-sessions-up?
+--ro number-of-sessions-down?
+--ro number-of-sessions-admin-down?
I'm a little confused by the meaning of the counters, and didn't see them
clearly defined anywhere. Apologies if I missed it...
Are "number-of-sessions-admin-down" included in "number-of-sessions-down"?
Is 'number-of-sessions' always equal to 'number-of-sessions-up' +
'number-of-sessions-down', or is it always equal to 'number-of-sessions-up'
+
'number-of-sessions-down' + 'number-of-sessions-admin-down', or are there
other
cases?
E.g: I have created 10 sessions (because I have 10 interfaces). 5 of them
are
down because there is no peer, 3 of them I've configured to be down (admin
down), and so 2 of them are up.
What should be in each of:
number-of-sessions?
number-of-sessions-up?
number-of-sessions-down?
number-of-sessions-admin-down?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you.
I also had a few minor nits:
Nits:
Section 1:
"The YANG modules in this document conform to the Network Management
Datastore
Architecture (NMDA) Network Management Datastore Architecture [RFC8342]. "
The
Department of Redundancy Department called and wants some of their words
back
please :-)
Section 2:
"Since BFD is used for liveliness detection of various forwarding
paths, there is no uniform key to identify a BFD session. So the BFD
data model is split in multiple YANG modules where each module
corresponds to one type of forwarding path."
I think this would be more readable as:
"... to identify a BFD session, and so the BFD..." (hey, I said it was a
nit)
