Sasha,
> On Feb 23, 2017, at 3:42 PM, Alexander Vainshtein
> <alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com> wrote:
>
> Stefano,
> I respectfully disagree.
>
> From my POV YANG data models (same as MIBs before them) are supposed to
> provide a comprehensive list of configurable parameters that impact operation
> of a protocol within the limits defined by the corresponding protocol spec.
Far be it from me to question yang benefits... ;-)
it’s just that, from a protocol definition perspective, I won’t assume a given
choice for management/configuration so that people can then chose snmp-mibs,
yang or whatever comes next.
Where I agree with you is on the need for yang models to support the sr/ldp
interop if the target is to be yang-capable on all aspects of protocol
implementations.
s.
>
> My 2c,
> Sasha
>
> Office: +972-39266302
> Cell: +972-549266302
> Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) [mailto:sprev...@cisco.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 4:17 PM
> To: Alexander Vainshtein <alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com>
> Cc: draft-ietf-spring-sr-y...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org; Michael Gorokhovsky
> <michael.gorokhov...@ecitele.com>
> Subject: Re: [spring] A question regarding mode of SR/LDP interop
>
>
>> On Feb 23, 2017, at 2:45 PM, Alexander Vainshtein
>> <alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>> I would like to point to what looks to me as inconsistency between the
>> current (-05) version of the SR YANG Data Model draft and the latest (-06)
>> version of the Segment Routing Interop with LDP draft.
>>
>> The following text has been added to the latter:
>>
>> Section 2 describes the co-existence of SR with other MPLS Control
>>
>> Plane. Section 3 documents a method to migrate from LDP to
>> SR-based
>>
>> MPLS tunneling. Section 4 documents the interworking between SR
>> and
>>
>> LDP in the case of non-homogeneous deployment. Section 5 describes
>>
>> how a partial SR deployment can be used to provide SR benefits to
>>
>> LDP-based traffic including a possible application of SR in the
>>
>> context of inter-domain MPLS use-cases.
>>
>>
>>
>> Typically, an implementation will allow an operator to select
>>
>> (through configuration) which of the described modes of SR and LDP
>>
>> co-existence to use.
>>
>>
>> To the best of my understanding, there is no match for the highlighted
>> configuration parameter in the former document.
>
>
> well, from an SR perspective, “through configuration” is not limited to
> YANG...
>
> s.
>
>
>> (This is expected since such a parameter has not been mentioned in the
>> previous (-05) version of the former).
>>
>> I hope the next version of the YANG Model draft will take care of that.
>>
>> Regards, and lots of thanks in advance, Sasha
>>
>> Office: +972-39266302
>> Cell: +972-549266302
>> Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com
>>
>> ___
>> spring mailing list
>> spring@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
>
___
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring