+1 on f2f meeting in Prague (if needed) I’d really like the draft to progress ASAP, so if there are any unaddressed issues, please bring them up. Cheers, Jeff
On 7/10/17, 14:44, "rtgwg on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: Hi Jeff, On 7/10/17, 4:32 PM, "rtgwg on behalf of Jeffrey Haas" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >Acee (and other authors), > >On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 02:42:01PM -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 Routing Area Working Group of the IETF. >> >> Title : Routing Area Common YANG Data Types >> Authors : Xufeng Liu >> Yingzhen Qu >> Acee Lindem >> Christian Hopps >> Lou Berger >> Filename : draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-08.txt >> Pages : 40 >> Date : 2017-06-29 >> >> Abstract: >> This document defines a collection of common data types using the >> YANG data modeling language. These derived common types are designed >> to be imported by other modules defined in the routing area. > >Thanks for the updates for the various route-target,origin and site of >origin extended community types. I'll try to take some some to read the >regex in detail. > >My lingering issue with the route-target types is that IETF work on VPNs >will continue to add extended communities to have route-target semantics >outside of the types originally defined in RFC 4360. The current example >of >this is the ES-Import community. I think this is a type that would be shared across L2VPN and BGP modules. We have this format for route-origin, we can add it for route-target preceded by “6:”. > >I believe we either need to: >1. Provide a generic format for types other than 0,1,2. Or, >2. Document how the relevant type is intended to be maintained. There is a trade-off here in providing strong typing and flexibility. I don’t see how we can anticipate the textual conventions for all future route target types in advance. If you want flexibility, we could just make it a string ;^) > >For example, the module that route-targets is part of is not IANA >maintained. > >If this issue is still unclear, let's plan on spending a small amount of >hallway time discussing this in Prague. Sounds good. Thanks, Acee > >-- Jeff > >_______________________________________________ >rtgwg mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
