[netmod] Erik Kline's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location-08: (with COMMENT)

[Erik Kline via Datatracker]

Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location-08: No Objection

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 DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location/



--
COMMENT:
--

[[ questions ]]

[ section 2.1 ]

* Is WGS-84 still the default for geodetic-datum when
  astronomical-body != "earth"?

  I think I might find it surprising if it were (i.e. if
  astronomical-body="enceladus" and geodetic-datum still defaults to "wgs-84"
  as opposed to an unspecified value or something that might cause a useful
  error message to be generated).

  I don't know enough YANG to know if the "when" statement is usable in this
  case to constrain the applicability of this default or not.


[[ nits ]]

[ section 3 ]

* In the description of "leaf astronomical-body",
  '67p/churyumov-gerasimenko lacks a closing quotation mark.



___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth

[Don Fedyk]

+1 The floating point format is really non-intuitive. We have used uint64 bit 
rates. 
Cheers
Don

-Original Message-
From: netmod  On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2021 8:27 AM
To: Italo Busi ; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' 
; Reshad Rahman 

Cc: 'netmod@ietf.org' ; t...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth

I'd be all for using some unsigned integer quantity. I think it was a mistake 
for using IEEE floating point in the first place. This floating point nonsense 
was carried over to Traffic Engineering (TE) from early work done on transport 
area on RSVP. For example, https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2210.txt and we've 
been stuck with it ever since... 

Thanks,
Acee

On 5/14/21, 6:08 AM, "netmod on behalf of Italo Busi"  wrote:

Reshad, Juergen,

Actually, there is some on-going discussion within TEAS because some packet 
technology-specific YANG modules are not using the bandwidth-ieee-float32 but 
prefers using some uint type:

https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/116

The ietf-te-packet-types already defines bandwidth-kbps, bandwidth-mbps and 
bandwidth-gbps but during the discussion of this open issue it was pointed out 
that it would be desirable to specify both the bandwidth and the units 
(Kbps/Mbps/Gbps)

Italo

> -Original Message-
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de]
> Sent: giovedì 13 maggio 2021 19:25
> To: Reshad Rahman 
> Cc: 'netmod@ietf.org' 
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth
> 
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 11:57:26AM -0400, Reshad Rahman wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > Has there been any discussions wrt adding new  bandwidth types e.g. the
> bandwidth-xxx types in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types? I see RFC8294 has
> bandwidth-ieee-float32 but it doesn’t have units (Kbps/Mbps/Gbps).
> >
> 
> The description of bandwidth-ieee-float32 says:
> 
>   The units are octets per second.
> 
> Note that draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types has been published as RFC 8776 in 
June
> 2020, it should be safe to use these definitions.
> 
> /js
> 
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder   Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103 
> 

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth

[Dieter Beller]

I concur with Carsten.

There is YANG modeling work currently ongoing in CCAMP where we are 
dealing with analog bandwidth (DWDM transport networks), which is 
measured in Hz, kHz, MHz, GHz, and THz.


So, the term bandwidth describing a data rate or bit rate has always 
been confusing in the DWDM network context. In this context we are also 
modeling the digital data flow carried by
a modulated optical carrier, where the analog bandwidth is an important 
property.



Thanks,
Dieter


On 14.05.2021 14:10, Carsten Bormann wrote:

On 2021-05-13, at 19:25, Juergen Schoenwaelder 
 wrote:

The description of bandwidth-ieee-float32 says:

  The units are octets per second.

The quantity you are looking for is called “bit rate” (IEC 8:13, item 
number 13-13).
Its unit is bit/s.

A single 64-bit integer should give you both the range and the precision you 
need for all practical applications outside millibit networks (“LPWANs”).

As does an IEEE 754 binary64 float (and, probably, a binary32), which will even 
cover millibit networks.

If you prefer software floating point, you can add an exponent.
A practical base could be 1000, so an exponent of 0 is bit/s, 1 is kbit/s, 2 is 
Mbit/s, 3 is Gbit/s, 4 is Tbit/s, and so on.  -1 and -2 would be mbit/s and 
µbit/s, units maybe many of you aren’t as familiar with.

Grüße, Carsten

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod


___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth

[Reshad Rahman]

On 2021-05-13, 1:25 PM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder" 
 
wrote:

On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 11:57:26AM -0400, Reshad Rahman wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> Has there been any discussions wrt adding new  bandwidth types e.g. the 
bandwidth-xxx types in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types? I see RFC8294 has 
bandwidth-ieee-float32 but it doesn’t have units (Kbps/Mbps/Gbps).
> 

The description of bandwidth-ieee-float32 says:

  The units are octets per second.

Note that draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types has been published as RFC 8776
in June 2020, it should be safe to use these definitions.

You are correct. I just wish that definition was in a "common" module instead 
of teas-te.

Regards,
Reshad.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder   Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103 

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod


___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth

[Acee Lindem (acee)]

I'd be all for using some unsigned integer quantity. I think it was a mistake 
for using IEEE floating point in the first place. This floating point nonsense 
was carried over to Traffic Engineering (TE) from early work done on transport 
area on RSVP. For example, https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2210.txt and we've 
been stuck with it ever since... 

Thanks,
Acee

On 5/14/21, 6:08 AM, "netmod on behalf of Italo Busi"  wrote:

Reshad, Juergen,

Actually, there is some on-going discussion within TEAS because some packet 
technology-specific YANG modules are not using the bandwidth-ieee-float32 but 
prefers using some uint type:

https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/116

The ietf-te-packet-types already defines bandwidth-kbps, bandwidth-mbps and 
bandwidth-gbps but during the discussion of this open issue it was pointed out 
that it would be desirable to specify both the bandwidth and the units 
(Kbps/Mbps/Gbps)

Italo

> -Original Message-
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de]
> Sent: giovedì 13 maggio 2021 19:25
> To: Reshad Rahman 
> Cc: 'netmod@ietf.org' 
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth
> 
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 11:57:26AM -0400, Reshad Rahman wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > Has there been any discussions wrt adding new  bandwidth types e.g. the
> bandwidth-xxx types in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types? I see RFC8294 has
> bandwidth-ieee-float32 but it doesn’t have units (Kbps/Mbps/Gbps).
> >
> 
> The description of bandwidth-ieee-float32 says:
> 
>   The units are octets per second.
> 
> Note that draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types has been published as RFC 8776 in 
June
> 2020, it should be safe to use these definitions.
> 
> /js
> 
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder   Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103 
> 

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth

[Carsten Bormann]

On 2021-05-13, at 19:25, Juergen Schoenwaelder 
 wrote:
> 
> The description of bandwidth-ieee-float32 says:
> 
>  The units are octets per second.

The quantity you are looking for is called “bit rate” (IEC 8:13, item 
number 13-13).
Its unit is bit/s.

A single 64-bit integer should give you both the range and the precision you 
need for all practical applications outside millibit networks (“LPWANs”).

As does an IEEE 754 binary64 float (and, probably, a binary32), which will even 
cover millibit networks.

If you prefer software floating point, you can add an exponent.
A practical base could be 1000, so an exponent of 0 is bit/s, 1 is kbit/s, 2 is 
Mbit/s, 3 is Gbit/s, 4 is Tbit/s, and so on.  -1 and -2 would be mbit/s and 
µbit/s, units maybe many of you aren’t as familiar with.

Grüße, Carsten

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth

[Juergen Schoenwaelder]

I assume it is best to settle this in teas. Form a programmatic point
of view, you likely want to have a single unit. Even if you go for bps
(bits per second), a uint64 still allows you to express quite big data
rates (I think 16777216 terra bits per second but please check
yourself). From a human point of view, having a notation that supports
different units may be desirable. But if you have multiple
representations, this surely increases implementation cost and it gets
you into answer questions whether there should be a canonical format
or a way to decide which unit is selected. Writing constraints in when
or must statements will also become much more fun.

Whether you really need the range of a floating point number, I can't
tell. Perhaps check what the realistic smallest and biggest bandwidth
is that you need to represent. Generally, floating point numbers seem
to be a no-brainer for management application writers but I have been
told that they are less frequently found in line cards or OS kernels.

/js

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:08:00AM +, Italo Busi wrote:
> Reshad, Juergen,
> 
> Actually, there is some on-going discussion within TEAS because some packet 
> technology-specific YANG modules are not using the bandwidth-ieee-float32 but 
> prefers using some uint type:
> 
> https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/116
> 
> The ietf-te-packet-types already defines bandwidth-kbps, bandwidth-mbps and 
> bandwidth-gbps but during the discussion of this open issue it was pointed 
> out that it would be desirable to specify both the bandwidth and the units 
> (Kbps/Mbps/Gbps)
> 
> Italo
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de]
> > Sent: giovedì 13 maggio 2021 19:25
> > To: Reshad Rahman 
> > Cc: 'netmod@ietf.org' 
> > Subject: Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth
> > 
> > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 11:57:26AM -0400, Reshad Rahman wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Has there been any discussions wrt adding new  bandwidth types e.g. the
> > bandwidth-xxx types in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types? I see RFC8294 has
> > bandwidth-ieee-float32 but it doesn’t have units (Kbps/Mbps/Gbps).
> > >
> > 
> > The description of bandwidth-ieee-float32 says:
> > 
> >   The units are octets per second.
> > 
> > Note that draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types has been published as RFC 8776 in 
> > June
> > 2020, it should be safe to use these definitions.
> > 
> > /js
> > 
> > --
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder   Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> > Fax:   +49 421 200 3103 
> > 
> 

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder   Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103 

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth

[Italo Busi]

Reshad, Juergen,

Actually, there is some on-going discussion within TEAS because some packet 
technology-specific YANG modules are not using the bandwidth-ieee-float32 but 
prefers using some uint type:

https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/116

The ietf-te-packet-types already defines bandwidth-kbps, bandwidth-mbps and 
bandwidth-gbps but during the discussion of this open issue it was pointed out 
that it would be desirable to specify both the bandwidth and the units 
(Kbps/Mbps/Gbps)

Italo

> -Original Message-
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de]
> Sent: giovedì 13 maggio 2021 19:25
> To: Reshad Rahman 
> Cc: 'netmod@ietf.org' 
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Typedefs for bandwidth
> 
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 11:57:26AM -0400, Reshad Rahman wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > Has there been any discussions wrt adding new  bandwidth types e.g. the
> bandwidth-xxx types in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types? I see RFC8294 has
> bandwidth-ieee-float32 but it doesn’t have units (Kbps/Mbps/Gbps).
> >
> 
> The description of bandwidth-ieee-float32 says:
> 
>   The units are octets per second.
> 
> Note that draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types has been published as RFC 8776 in June
> 2020, it should be safe to use these definitions.
> 
> /js
> 
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder   Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103 
> 

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod