Tom, Good catch!
I'll talk this over with the various co chairs and come back with a suggestion on how to reconcile the LSR and TEAS drafts.
Lou (TEAS Co-chair) On 1/2/2019 5:20 AM, tom petch wrote:
The TEAS WG is producing a te-types I-D which contains definitions, in YANG form, for many of the signaling parameters used by GMPLS. Meanwhile, the LSR WG has a need to defind the signaling parameters used for TE and so has created its own definitions thereof. There is an expired I2RS I-D with similar definitions. Perhaps, in future, the MPLS or CCAMP WG will also find a need to define these parameters and create their own definitions. Meanwhile, these parameters have, for over 15 years, been registered with IANA. Defining things good, defining things in standards multiple times, not so good. I think there is a need for these parameters, some, although perhaps not all, of http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters/gmpls-sig-parameter s.xhtml#gmpls-sig-parameters-3 to be turned into a YANG module for all WG to use. Such an exercise has been successfully carried out by the NETMOD WG for interface definitions (RFC7224). Tom Petch
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
