Mahesh:

Thank you for your input on the MEF L2 Service topologies. =

Just to be clear, the I2RS L2 Topology model is simply a virtual = topology model as specified in the I2RS charter.=C2=A0 This virtual = topology model provides a link between the Service layer, L3 layer, L2 = layer, and the physical topology. =C2=A0These virtual topologies provide = a seamless protocol independent virtual topology that operators may = utilize. =C2=A0

The I2RS virtual topology is not the L2 Bridge configuration and = operational status that 802.1 is developing. The I2RS L2 virtual = topology needs to align with 802.1 Bridge and operational status work, = but it does not provide the configuration and operational state. = =C2=A0=C2=A0

I2RS L2 yang modules that would augment the L2 Bridge configuration = and operational state for the I2RS interface are not in charter = =C2=A0The I2RS is not chartered to work on L2 Service topologies.=C2=A0 = I also encourage authors to work with you for those MEF L2 Service = topologies. =C2=A0

In interest of rapid advancement of all yang work, =C2=A0individuals = may discuss/get advice for I2RS specific issues for L2 yang modules for = these L2 Bridge or MEF L2 Service topologies. =C2=A0It is great to see = the yang work take off.

Sue

From:= = Mahesh Jethanandani [mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com]
Sent: = Monday, April 06, 2015 4:10 PM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: = Thomas D. Nadeau; Juergen Schoenwaelder; i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy); = Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Carl Moberg (camoberg)
Subject: Re: = [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for = draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt

There = is a PAR/CSD making its way through dot1Q to develop YANG models in that = committee. The first of those models is to develop the bridge = model.

In addition to IEEE, I would think that the L2 = topology work would be better served in MEF where we are trying to = develop service models for L2 services. As a editor of that project, I = would love a contribution from the authors and will support it = there.

On Mon, = Apr 6, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

Tom:

I'll drop a = note to official liaison for IEEE is a good idea, and other = IEEE
members of 802.1 I know. Thank you for that = input.

The I2RS L2 protocol topology is the protocol independent = topology. Just as
Alexander Clemm points out that the L3 = topology may be a virtual composite
of either the static setting or a = combination of the protocol specific
topologies, the L2 topology is a = virtual composite of the lower L2
topologies.

Sue = Hares

-----Original Message-----
From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Thomas D. Nadeau
Sent: Monday, = April 06, 2015 3:32 PM
To: Juergen = Schoenwaelder
Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); = Susan Hares; Dongjie (Jimmy)
Subject: Re: = [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for
draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt

=

> On Apr 6, 2015:11:17 AM, = at 11:17 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder
<j.schoenwaelder@jaco= bs-university.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at = 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote:
>> This begins a 2 week = adoption call for
>> = draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.
>>
>> Please = indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" = and
>> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent = pairs to query
>> information about L2 topology. The = draft can be found at:
>>
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-netw= ork-topology/
>>
>> <http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l= 3-topo/>
>
> I wonder how this will interwork with = any possible IEEE work. Bridges
> and VLANs had been modeled as = MIBs back in a day but we meanwhile
> transferred work all over to = IEEE. I think there should be some IEEE
> liaison interaction = here.

There has been indication at = least, that the IEEE was going to
embark on this work to reflect the = L2/bridge MIB work that went on there.
But as you say, there has been = no official liaison to the IETF on this.
Perhaps Dan (CC:ed) = knows?

--Tom

> I also = wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things that
> = are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no = mention
> of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap.
>
> There = are many other things I do not understand. Why is a chassis-id a
> = mac-address (and how relates this notion of a chassis to the = physical
> entity modeling work). How is this going to be = implemented? Is the
> idea that the information is extracted out = of a briding process or do
> protocols such as layer two discovery = protocols like LLDP play a role
> here? In short, I think this = model needs some decent IEEE layer two
> expertise - so does this = really fall into the scope of I2RS?
>
> /js
>
> = --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder = Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 = Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> = Fax: +49 421 200 = 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>
>= ; _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing = list
> i2rs@ietf.org
> = https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
><= br>
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing = list
i2rs@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

_= ______________________________________________
i2rs mailing = list
i2rs@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

-- =

Mahesh = Jethanandani

mjethanandani@gmail.com

<= /div>

------=_NextPart_000_001E_01D07088.021AAC30-- From nobody Mon Apr 6 13:43:04 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C708C1A9166 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:43:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -96.354 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-96.354 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WjsMjadQRWm8 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (hhc-web3.hickoryhill-consulting.com [64.9.205.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7772A1A9165 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:43:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=74.43.47.142; From: "Susan Hares" To: Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 16:43:00 -0400 Message-ID: <003701d070aa$459665e0$d0c331a0$@ndzh.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0038_01D07088.BE882140" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AdBwqeJQzwqJon4bT3e5urGQlBh/wg== X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com Archived-At: Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas' Subject: [i2rs] Interim dates - move to Wednesday at 10-11:30 ET X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 20:43:03 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01D07088.BE882140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alia Atlas (our Routing AD) has requested that we move the I2RS interims from Thursday to Wednesdays. Based on this feedback, we plan to hold the I2RS interims on these dates at this time. Date Time (EDT) Topic 4/15 10:00 -11:30am I2RS protocol (alternate protocol proposal) 4/29 10:00-11:30am I2RS protocol requirements 5/13 10:00-11:30am Filter-Based RIB 5/27 10:00-11:30am L2 and L3 Topology with Traffic Engineering 6/10 10:00-11:30am I2RS Protocol specification 6/24 10:00-11:30am I2RS Protocol specification Please let me know if these changed dates cause an conflicts with other WGs. Sue Hares ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01D07088.BE882140 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Alia Atlas (our Routing AD) = has requested that we move the I2RS interims from Thursday to = Wednesdays. Based on this feedback, we plan to hold the I2RS = interims on these dates at this time.

Date	Time = (EDT)	Topic =
4/15	10:00 = -11:30am	I2RS = protocol (alternate protocol proposal) =
4/29	10:00-11:30am	I2RS = protocol requirements
5/13	10:00-11:30am	Filter-Based RIB
5/27	10:00-11:30am	L2 = and L3 Topology with Traffic = Engineering
6/10	10:00-11:30am	I2RS = Protocol specification
6/24 =	10:00-11:30am	I2RS = Protocol specification

<= p class=3DMsoNormal>Please let me know if these = changed dates cause an conflicts with other WGs. =

Sue Hares =

------=_NextPart_000_0038_01D07088.BE882140-- From nobody Mon Apr 6 13:47:20 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C10D81A916B for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:47:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.266 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.266 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hm-ZzRhrNFzx for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00103a01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00103a01.pphosted.com [67.231.152.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D6B91A92F8 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0002317.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00103a01.pphosted.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id t36KjPtO007961; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 16:46:57 -0400 Received: from vawvcgsie2k1301.ciena.com (LIN1-118-36-35.ciena.com [63.118.36.35]) by mx0b-00103a01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1th79cj95d-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 06 Apr 2015 16:46:57 -0400 Received: from ONWVEXCHHT04.ciena.com (10.128.6.44) by VAWVCGSIE2K1301.ciena.com (10.4.62.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.847.32; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 16:46:56 -0400 Received: from ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com ([::1]) by ONWVEXCHHT04.ciena.com ([::1]) with mapi; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 16:46:55 -0400 From: "Shah, Himanshu" To: Susan Hares , "'Thomas D. Nadeau'" , "'Juergen Schoenwaelder'" Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 16:46:54 -0400 Thread-Topic: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt Thread-Index: AQKGyYQkyVg3yD7ZXWu2oc2gzWs4vwFhHGuIAqwX6Iybs0npIIAADl4A Message-ID: <40746B2300A8FC4AB04EE722A593182B87E5744A@ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com> References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <1AB52A08-4B89-490F-9791-805F5768E0C5@lucidvision.com> <000301d070a3$ea42c950$bec85bf0$@ndzh.com> In-Reply-To: <000301d070a3$ea42c950$bec85bf0$@ndzh.com> Accept-Language: en-US, en-CA Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, en-CA x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.0.0.1412-7.000.1014-21454.001 x-tm-as-result: No--56.700000-8.000000-31 x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.13.68, 1.0.33, 0.0.0000 definitions=2015-04-06_04:2015-04-06,2015-04-06,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1402240000 definitions=main-1504060192 Archived-At: Cc: "i2rs@ietf.org" , "'Romascanu, Dan $Dan$'" , "'Dongjie $Jimmy$'" Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 20:47:19 -0000 I agree with Tom. This work does not seem to applicable to I2RS WG. At best, it is related to L2VPN WG, now, PALS and BESS. And in addition, there are other SDOs that are working on this as well. It would be difficult to unwind the overlap. /himanshu -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 3:57 PM To: 'Thomas D. Nadeau'; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; 'Dongjie (Jimmy)'; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)' Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-= topology-01.txt Tom: I'll drop a note to official liaison for IEEE is a good idea, and other IEE= E members of 802.1 I know. Thank you for that input.=20 The I2RS L2 protocol topology is the protocol independent topology. Just a= s Alexander Clemm points out that the L3 topology may be a virtual composit= e of either the static setting or a combination of the protocol specific to= pologies, the L2 topology is a virtual composite of the lower L2 topologies= . =20 Sue Hares=20 -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas D. Nadeau Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 3:32 PM To: Juergen Schoenwaelder Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Susan Hares; Dongjie (Jimmy) Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-= topology-01.txt > On Apr 6, 2015:11:17 AM, at 11:17 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: >=20 > On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: >> This begins a 2 week adoption call for=20 >> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. >>=20 >> Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and=20 >> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query=20 >> information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: >>=20 >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology/ >>=20 >> >=20 > I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. Bridges=20 > and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we meanwhile=20 > transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should be some IEEE=20 > liaison interaction here. There has been indication at least, that the IEEE was going to embark on t= his work to reflect the L2/bridge MIB work that went on there. But as you say, there has been no official liaison to the IETF on this. Perhaps Dan (CC:ed) knows? --Tom > I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things that=20 > are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no mention=20 > of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. >=20 > There are many other things I do not understand. Why is a chassis-id a=20 > mac-address (and how relates this notion of a chassis to the physical=20 > entity modeling work). How is this going to be implemented? Is the=20 > idea that the information is extracted out of a briding process or do=20 > protocols such as layer two discovery protocols like LLDP play a role=20 > here? In short, I think this model needs some decent IEEE layer two=20 > expertise - so does this really fall into the scope of I2RS? >=20 > /js >=20 > --=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >=20 _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs From nobody Mon Apr 6 15:00:08 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71F501ACD9A for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 15:00:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.055 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.055 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xLP-ikTQPTA5 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 15:00:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (hhc-web3.hickoryhill-consulting.com [64.9.205.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C5CD1ACD97 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 15:00:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=74.43.47.142; From: "Susan Hares" To: "'Shah, Himanshu'" , "'Thomas D. Nadeau'" , "'Juergen Schoenwaelder'" References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <1AB52A08-4B89-490F-9791-805F5768E0C5@lucidvision.com> <000301d070a3$ea42c950$bec85bf0$@ndzh.com> <40746B2300A8FC4AB04EE722A593182B87E5744A@ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com> In-Reply-To: <40746B2300A8FC4AB04EE722A593182B87E5744A@ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com> Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 17:59:50 -0400 Message-ID: <008501d070b5$019ea4f0$04dbeed0$@ndzh.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQKGyYQkyVg3yD7ZXWu2oc2gzWs4vwFhHGuIAqwX6IwCEZzraAJkhqplm4+60kA= X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com Archived-At: Cc: i2rs@ietf.org, "'Dongjie $Jimmy$'" , "'Romascanu, Dan $Dan$'" Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 22:00:04 -0000 Himanshu: Just to make sure I understand your comment, you do not feel an I2RS WG draft on topology should include a protocol independent virtual topology at Layer 2. I will bring this comment to the attention of the Routing AD in charge of the I2RS work. The L2VPN, BESS, IEEE, PALS document are considered protocol specific topologies - so these are not the same thing (according to Alia Atlas, AD). The I2RS Working group is not charter to work on these protocol-specific modules. I do agree that TEAS and I2RS carefully need to work through on the Traffic Engineering topologies and logical topologies. I am monitoring the design teams so that we coordinate this portion of the TEAS/I2RS work. Sue -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Shah, Himanshu Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 4:47 PM To: Susan Hares; 'Thomas D. Nadeau'; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Dongjie (Jimmy)' Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt I agree with Tom. This work does not seem to applicable to I2RS WG. At best, it is related to L2VPN WG, now, PALS and BESS. And in addition, there are other SDOs that are working on this as well. It would be difficult to unwind the overlap. /himanshu -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 3:57 PM To: 'Thomas D. Nadeau'; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; 'Dongjie (Jimmy)'; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)' Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt Tom: I'll drop a note to official liaison for IEEE is a good idea, and other IEEE members of 802.1 I know. Thank you for that input. The I2RS L2 protocol topology is the protocol independent topology. Just as Alexander Clemm points out that the L3 topology may be a virtual composite of either the static setting or a combination of the protocol specific topologies, the L2 topology is a virtual composite of the lower L2 topologies. Sue Hares -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas D. Nadeau Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 3:32 PM To: Juergen Schoenwaelder Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Susan Hares; Dongjie (Jimmy) Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt > On Apr 6, 2015:11:17 AM, at 11:17 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: >> This begins a 2 week adoption call for >> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. >> >> Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and >> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query >> information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: >> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology/ >> >> > > I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. Bridges > and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we meanwhile > transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should be some IEEE > liaison interaction here. There has been indication at least, that the IEEE was going to embark on this work to reflect the L2/bridge MIB work that went on there. But as you say, there has been no official liaison to the IETF on this. Perhaps Dan (CC:ed) knows? --Tom > I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things that > are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no mention > of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. > > There are many other things I do not understand. Why is a chassis-id a > mac-address (and how relates this notion of a chassis to the physical > entity modeling work). How is this going to be implemented? Is the > idea that the information is extracted out of a briding process or do > protocols such as layer two discovery protocols like LLDP play a role > here? In short, I think this model needs some decent IEEE layer two > expertise - so does this really fall into the scope of I2RS? > > /js > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs From nobody Mon Apr 6 15:14:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE351A00DB; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 15:14:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bBtHeysOv1NF; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 15:14:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E02921A00CC; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 15:14:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IESG Secretary To: "IETF Announcement List" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.13.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20150406221405.27840.93809.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 15:14:05 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: i2rs@ietf.org Subject: [i2rs] I2RS WG Virtual Interim Meetings: April 29, 2015; May 13, 2015; May 27, 2015; June 10, 2015; June 24, 2015 X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 22:14:07 -0000 The Interface to the Routing System (I2RS) WG will hold virtual interim meetings on the following dates: Date: April 29, 2015 Time: 10:00-11:30 AM EDT (14:00-15:30 UTC) Topic: I2RS protocol requirements Date: May 13, 2015 Time: 10:00-11:30 AM EDT (14:00-15:30 UTC) Topic: Filter-Based RIB Date: May 27, 2015 Time: 10:00-11:30 AM EDT (14:00-15:30 UTC) Topic: L2 and L3 Topology with Traffic Engineering Date: June 10, 2015 Time: 10:00-11:30 AM EDT (14:00-15:30 UTC) Topic: I2RS Protocol specification Date: June 24, 2015 Time: 10:00-11:30 AM EDT (14:00-15:30 UTC) Topic: I2RS Protocol specification WebEx details will follow on the I2RS mailing list. From nobody Tue Apr 7 00:30:28 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715981B3285 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 00:30:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.86 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.86 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aVWkQGZNbni8 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 00:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de (atlas3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B7B21B3284 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 00:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B76EBE; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:30:24 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.220]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id YLtit3nC0GPV; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:30:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hermes.jacobs-university.de", Issuer "Jacobs University CA - G01" (verified OK)) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:30:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.46]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7F0920036; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:30:22 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id egXSwHJxj-ci; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:30:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03CD220033; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:30:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id E2F7032B5EF8; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:30:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:30:19 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Susan Hares Message-ID: <20150407073016.GD7019@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Susan Hares , "'Thomas D. Nadeau'" , i2rs@ietf.org, "'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'" , "'Dongjie (Jimmy)'" References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <1AB52A08-4B89-490F-9791-805F5768E0C5@lucidvision.com> <000301d070a3$ea42c950$bec85bf0$@ndzh.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <000301d070a3$ea42c950$bec85bf0$@ndzh.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Archived-At: Cc: "'Thomas D. Nadeau'" , "'Dongjie $Jimmy$'" , "'Romascanu, Dan $Dan$'" , i2rs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 07:30:27 -0000 On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 03:57:29PM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > > The I2RS L2 protocol topology is the protocol independent topology. Just as > Alexander Clemm points out that the L3 topology may be a virtual composite > of either the static setting or a combination of the protocol specific > topologies, the L2 topology is a virtual composite of the lower L2 > topologies. > Why is a "virtual composite of the lower L2 topologies", needed to achieve the goals of I2RS? Since IEEE 802 networks are reasonably common technology, I think a "virtual composite of the lower L2 topology" should make sure it represents IEEE 802 topologies well. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From nobody Tue Apr 7 02:36:28 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 222211B339A for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 02:36:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CXBcEVqPhVV2 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 02:36:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1977B1B3399 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 02:36:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BRC82981; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 09:36:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from NKGEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.39) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:36:21 +0100 Received: from NKGEML512-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.7.135]) by nkgeml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.39]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 17:36:18 +0800 From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" To: Juergen Schoenwaelder , Susan Hares Thread-Topic: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt Thread-Index: AQHQcHzhIwYkRMPLF0GDnvEoA+nLIZ1BPrvQ Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:36:18 +0000 Message-ID: <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> In-Reply-To: <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.97.131] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "i2rs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 09:36:27 -0000 Hi Juergen,=20 Thanks for your comments on this L2 topology model. Please see some replies= inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:18 PM > To: Susan Hares > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy) > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >=20 > On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > > This begins a 2 week adoption call for > > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. > > > > Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and discuss > > how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query information > > about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: > > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology/ > > > > >=20 > I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. Bridges and > VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we meanwhile transferred > work all over to IEEE. I think there should be some IEEE liaison interact= ion here. > > I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things that are > already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no mention of RFC= 7223 > yet there is overlap. As a topology model, the L2 topology model is focusing on the overview of c= onnectivity between the network entities from layer-2's perspective, thus t= he detailed config and operational information of interfaces will not be co= vered in this model, only those which are used as the identifiers of nodes = and termination-points are included. We will take a look at whether the int= erface model should be referenced here.=20 > There are many other things I do not understand. Why is a chassis-id a > mac-address (and how relates this notion of a chassis to the physical ent= ity > modeling work). How is this going to be implemented? Is the idea that the > information is extracted out of a briding process or do protocols such as= layer > two discovery protocols like LLDP play a role here? In short, I think thi= s model > needs some decent IEEE layer two expertise - so does this really fall int= o the > scope of I2RS? The chassis-id here has the same meaning as it is in LLDP. Currently its ty= pe is set to mac-address as one common implementation. This could be update= d with a more generic type. The information can be extracted from bridging process, LLDP or other sourc= es. This topology model just use the collected information to specify the t= opology of the layer-2 network, no matter where such information comes from= . As Sue replied, liaison to IEEE is a good idea. While we need to keep in mi= nd that this L2 topology model will not reflect too much details of differe= nt L2 technologies. This is similar to the relationship between the L3 topo= logy model and the L3 protocol specific models. Best regards, Jie >=20 > /js >=20 > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From nobody Tue Apr 7 02:44:44 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 566C21A1A28 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 02:44:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.86 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.86 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RpxFCRcgoC8M for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 02:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de (atlas3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8804E1A0419 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 02:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B9C0724; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:44:41 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.220]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id KNO_8Px2ZX5d; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:44:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hermes.jacobs-university.de", Issuer "Jacobs University CA - G01" (verified OK)) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:44:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.49]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC5C32002B; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:44:39 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e7Y4oXE6i3Et; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:44:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3592520013; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:44:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3EF9332B62A4; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:44:36 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:44:36 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" Message-ID: <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" , Susan Hares , "i2rs@ietf.org" References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Archived-At: Cc: "i2rs@ietf.org" , Susan Hares Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 09:44:44 -0000 On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:36:18AM +0000, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > Thanks for your comments on this L2 topology model. Please see some replies inline. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] > > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:18 PM > > To: Susan Hares > > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy) > > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt > > > > On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > > > This begins a 2 week adoption call for > > > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. > > > > > > Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and discuss > > > how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query information > > > about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: > > > > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology/ > > > > > > > > > > I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. Bridges and > > VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we meanwhile transferred > > work all over to IEEE. I think there should be some IEEE liaison interaction here. > > > > I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things that are > > already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no mention of RFC 7223 > > yet there is overlap. > > As a topology model, the L2 topology model is focusing on the overview of connectivity between the network entities from layer-2's perspective, thus the detailed config and operational information of interfaces will not be covered in this model, only those which are used as the identifiers of nodes and termination-points are included. We will take a look at whether the interface model should be referenced here. > Are you saying you will take out all objects that are interface specific? I think there should be text explaining the relationship to the ietf-interfaces model and extensions of it. > The chassis-id here has the same meaning as it is in LLDP. Currently its type is set to mac-address as one common implementation. This could be updated with a more generic type. Well, it is simply under specified what it is. And there is the model of physical entities where a chassis has a specific meaning. Anyway, there needs to be more relationship sections explaining all this. But at this point, many things are simply too vague to understand what they mean and it is unclear where the information would come from. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From nobody Tue Apr 7 03:00:53 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD01F1A1BCF for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 03:00:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IOoyWo_cmWM9 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 03:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B5F21A1BD4 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 03:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BRC86308; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 10:00:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nkgeml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.36) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:00:47 +0100 Received: from NKGEML512-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.7.135]) by nkgeml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.36]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 18:00:42 +0800 From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" To: "Shah, Himanshu" , Susan Hares , "'Thomas D. Nadeau'" , "'Juergen Schoenwaelder'" Thread-Topic: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt Thread-Index: AQHQcHzhIwYkRMPLF0GDnvEoA+nLIZ0/2ZqAgAAHIoCAAA3PAIABXoHA Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:00:41 +0000 Message-ID: <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE08A@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <1AB52A08-4B89-490F-9791-805F5768E0C5@lucidvision.com> <000301d070a3$ea42c950$bec85bf0$@ndzh.com> <40746B2300A8FC4AB04EE722A593182B87E5744A@ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com> In-Reply-To: <40746B2300A8FC4AB04EE722A593182B87E5744A@ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.97.131] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "i2rs@ietf.org" , "'Romascanu, Dan $Dan$'" Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 10:00:51 -0000 Hi Himanshu, Thanks for your comments.=20 Regarding the relationship between the L2 topology model and L2VPN model, c= urrently this draft treats L2VPN as one approach of building particular con= nectivity in a L2 topology, and part or all of a L2 topology can also be es= tablished using other l2 technologies, e.g. Ethernet, TRILL, L2 overlay etc= . Thus in my view the L2VPN model and this L2 topology model are complement= ary work. Of course we would like to discuss and coordinate with the L2VPN = model design team in details of the model. As for other SDOs working on this, could you provide more information so th= at we could see whether they are also complementary or there is some overla= p? Thanks. Best regards, Jie > -----Original Message----- > From: Shah, Himanshu [mailto:hshah@ciena.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 4:47 AM > To: Susan Hares; 'Thomas D. Nadeau'; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy); 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)' > Subject: RE: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >=20 > I agree with Tom. This work does not seem to applicable to I2RS WG. > At best, it is related to L2VPN WG, now, PALS and BESS. > And in addition, there are other SDOs that are working on this as well. > It would be difficult to unwind the overlap. >=20 > /himanshu >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 3:57 PM > To: 'Thomas D. Nadeau'; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; 'Dongjie (Jimmy)'; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)' > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >=20 > Tom: >=20 > I'll drop a note to official liaison for IEEE is a good idea, and other I= EEE > members of 802.1 I know. Thank you for that input. >=20 > The I2RS L2 protocol topology is the protocol independent topology. Just= as > Alexander Clemm points out that the L3 topology may be a virtual composit= e of > either the static setting or a combination of the protocol specific topol= ogies, > the L2 topology is a virtual composite of the lower L2 topologies. >=20 > Sue Hares >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas D. Nadeau > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 3:32 PM > To: Juergen Schoenwaelder > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Susan Hares; Dongjie (Jimmy) > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >=20 >=20 > > On Apr 6, 2015:11:17 AM, at 11:17 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > >> This begins a 2 week adoption call for > >> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. > >> > >> Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and > >> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query > >> information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: > >> > >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology/ > >> > >> > > > > I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. Bridges > > and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we meanwhile > > transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should be some IEEE > > liaison interaction here. >=20 > There has been indication at least, that the IEEE was going to embark on > this work to reflect the L2/bridge MIB work that went on there. > But as you say, there has been no official liaison to the IETF on this. > Perhaps Dan (CC:ed) knows? >=20 > --Tom >=20 >=20 > > I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things that > > are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no mention > > of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. > > > > There are many other things I do not understand. Why is a chassis-id a > > mac-address (and how relates this notion of a chassis to the physical > > entity modeling work). How is this going to be implemented? Is the > > idea that the information is extracted out of a briding process or do > > protocols such as layer two discovery protocols like LLDP play a role > > here? In short, I think this model needs some decent IEEE layer two > > expertise - so does this really fall into the scope of I2RS? > > > > /js > > > > -- > > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | > Germany > > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > i2rs mailing list > > i2rs@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > >=20 > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >=20 > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs From nobody Tue Apr 7 06:40:25 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 385581A8862 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:40:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.055 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.055 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HfWDLgrELRfL for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:40:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (hhc-web3.hickoryhill-consulting.com [64.9.205.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73ADF1B3578 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:39:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=74.43.47.142; From: "Susan Hares" To: "'Juergen Schoenwaelder'" , "'Dongjie $Jimmy$'" References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> In-Reply-To: <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:39:08 -0400 Message-ID: <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQKGyYQkyVg3yD7ZXWu2oc2gzWs4vwFhHGuIAOxJ8L4BOdVPhpu4oX4g X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com Archived-At: Cc: i2rs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 13:40:23 -0000 Juergen: This is good feedback on the L2 topology versus interface module. Stating "taking out all objects that are interface specific" is a bit broad, but in principle specifics that belong to interfaces should be in the interfaces module. The L2 specification is part of a virtual topology that reflects interfaces, links, nodes, and terminating points. There will be some references to the virtual principles. Some things chassis-id imply a shared group resources (interfaces in a chassis) which creates a shared risk group. The virtual topology needs to indicate which interfaces are within a shared risk group. As Jie has mentioned, he will take into account your comments in the next revision of the draft. I have already spoken to some IEEE people about who to talk to about the LLDP yang modules. It appears the appropriate group is the 802.1 working group, and I will send a note to the chair today. Sue -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 5:45 AM To: Dongjie (Jimmy) Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Susan Hares Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:36:18AM +0000, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > Thanks for your comments on this L2 topology model. Please see some replies inline. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder > > [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] > > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:18 PM > > To: Susan Hares > > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy) > > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt > > > > On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > > > This begins a 2 week adoption call for > > > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. > > > > > > Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and > > > discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query > > > information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: > > > > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topolog > > > y/ > > > > > > > > > > I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. > > Bridges and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we > > meanwhile transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should be some IEEE liaison interaction here. > > > > I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things > > that are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no > > mention of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. > > As a topology model, the L2 topology model is focusing on the overview of connectivity between the network entities from layer-2's perspective, thus the detailed config and operational information of interfaces will not be covered in this model, only those which are used as the identifiers of nodes and termination-points are included. We will take a look at whether the interface model should be referenced here. > Are you saying you will take out all objects that are interface specific? I think there should be text explaining the relationship to the ietf-interfaces model and extensions of it. > The chassis-id here has the same meaning as it is in LLDP. Currently its type is set to mac-address as one common implementation. This could be updated with a more generic type. Well, it is simply under specified what it is. And there is the model of physical entities where a chassis has a specific meaning. Anyway, there needs to be more relationship sections explaining all this. But at this point, many things are simply too vague to understand what they mean and it is unclear where the information would come from. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs From nobody Tue Apr 7 06:47:10 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FFE91A1BDA for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:47:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.86 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.86 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EGXNuHXYz9tj for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:47:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de (atlas3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1963E1A8862 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:47:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB980E7C; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:47:05 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.220]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id SGmAYFJXtoK7; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:46:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hermes.jacobs-university.de", Issuer "Jacobs University CA - G01" (verified OK)) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:47:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.46]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2FBA2002B; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:47:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3ITdRlAeMDYS; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:47:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54DEE2002C; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:47:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3DA3632B75F0; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:47:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:46:59 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Susan Hares Message-ID: <20150407134659.GA11200@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Susan Hares , "'Dongjie (Jimmy)'" , i2rs@ietf.org References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Archived-At: Cc: "'Dongjie $Jimmy$'" , i2rs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 13:47:09 -0000 On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:39:08AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > > Juergen: > > This is good feedback on the L2 topology versus interface module. > > Stating "taking out all objects that are interface specific" is a bit broad, > but in principle specifics that belong to interfaces should be in the > interfaces module. The L2 specification is part of a virtual topology that > reflects interfaces, links, nodes, and terminating points. There will be > some references to the virtual principles. Some things chassis-id imply a > shared group resources (interfaces in a chassis) which creates a shared risk > group. The virtual topology needs to indicate which interfaces are within a > shared risk group. As Jie has mentioned, he will take into account your > comments in the next revision of the draft. Susan, multiple overlapping objects marked config true I believe are asking for trouble. Read-only is a different story but when it comes to config true objects, I am rather concerned about multiple knobs to change the same underlying resource without a clear specification how conflicts are resolved (or whether access control can be bypassed through such repeated objects). So let me revise my statement to "taking out all config true objects that are interface specific". /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From nobody Tue Apr 7 06:59:07 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B231B35D9 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:59:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.055 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.055 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eKq1QLcVIZzZ for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:59:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (hhc-web3.hickoryhill-consulting.com [64.9.205.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5D801B35D7 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:59:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=forwardok (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=74.43.47.142; From: "Susan Hares" To: "'Juergen Schoenwaelder'" References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> <20150407134659.GA11200@elstar.local> In-Reply-To: <20150407134659.GA11200@elstar.local> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:55:47 -0400 Message-ID: <000001d0713a$8cc61ce0$a65256a0$@ndzh.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQKGyYQkyVg3yD7ZXWu2oc2gzWs4vwFhHGuIAOxJ8L4BOdVPhgHHUgIqAb1JOXCbnIGHwA== X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com Archived-At: Cc: "'Dongjie $Jimmy$'" , i2rs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 13:59:06 -0000 Juergen: Your concern about "multiple overlapping objects marked config true" is reasonable, but the virtual topology is within the ephemeral I2RS state. If L2 changes state, then the ephemeral state is being changed (config true, ephemeral true) The ephemeral I2RS state is a topic which deserves a substantial amount of discussion on the list. I will begin another topic on the mail list by tomorrow (I want to review all netconf/netmod and mail list discussions before I start). However, all the I2RS topology drafts assume the ephemeral state. I hope this helps the future part of this discussion. Sue -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 9:47 AM To: Susan Hares Cc: 'Dongjie (Jimmy)'; i2rs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:39:08AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > > Juergen: > > This is good feedback on the L2 topology versus interface module. > > Stating "taking out all objects that are interface specific" is a bit > broad, but in principle specifics that belong to interfaces should be > in the interfaces module. The L2 specification is part of a virtual > topology that reflects interfaces, links, nodes, and terminating > points. There will be some references to the virtual principles. Some > things chassis-id imply a shared group resources (interfaces in a > chassis) which creates a shared risk group. The virtual topology > needs to indicate which interfaces are within a shared risk group. As > Jie has mentioned, he will take into account your comments in the next revision of the draft. Susan, multiple overlapping objects marked config true I believe are asking for trouble. Read-only is a different story but when it comes to config true objects, I am rather concerned about multiple knobs to change the same underlying resource without a clear specification how conflicts are resolved (or whether access control can be bypassed through such repeated objects). So let me revise my statement to "taking out all config true objects that are interface specific". /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs From nobody Tue Apr 7 07:17:33 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 690F31A1A91 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:17:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.895 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4UohsPVXHlEe for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:17:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lucidvision.com (unknown [50.255.148.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964C61A8846 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:17:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.108] (unknown [50.255.148.181]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E09B321141A; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:17:27 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 $2070.6$) From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" In-Reply-To: <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:17:26 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <266BDF8B-6C86-4B9C-9A49-DAAFE902E726@lucidvision.com> References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> To: Susan Hares X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) Archived-At: Cc: "Dongjie $Jimmy$" , Juergen Schoenwaelder , i2rs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 14:17:32 -0000 > On Apr 7, 2015:9:39 AM, at 9:39 AM, Susan Hares = wrote: >=20 >=20 > Juergen:=20 >=20 > This is good feedback on the L2 topology versus interface module.=20 >=20 > Stating "taking out all objects that are interface specific" is a bit = broad, > but in principle specifics that belong to interfaces should be in the > interfaces module. The L2 specification is part of a virtual topology = that > reflects interfaces, links, nodes, and terminating points. There will = be > some references to the virtual principles. Some things chassis-id = imply a > shared group resources (interfaces in a chassis) which creates a = shared risk > group. The virtual topology needs to indicate which interfaces are = within a > shared risk group. As Jie has mentioned, he will take into account = your > comments in the next revision of the draft. =20 I agree with Juergen on the interfaces point. I also want to = remind folks that the chassis-related stuff are being broken off and put into the=20 effort to build the Entity-MIB Yang Model. There is a design team that I kicked off in NETMOD to do this work. Jimmy is part of that DT and should be able to sync up with that effort. --Tom > I have already spoken to some IEEE people about who to talk to about = the > LLDP yang modules. It appears the appropriate group is the 802.1 = working > group, and I will send a note to the chair today.=20 >=20 > Sue=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen = Schoenwaelder > Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 5:45 AM > To: Dongjie (Jimmy) > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Susan Hares > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >=20 > On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:36:18AM +0000, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: >> Hi Juergen, >>=20 >> Thanks for your comments on this L2 topology model. Please see some > replies inline. >>=20 >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder=20 >>> [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] >>> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:18 PM >>> To: Susan Hares >>> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy) >>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for=20 >>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >>>=20 >>> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: >>>> This begins a 2 week adoption call for=20 >>>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. >>>>=20 >>>> Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and=20 >>>> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query=20= >>>> information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: >>>>=20 >>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topolog >>>> y/ >>>>=20 >>>> >>>=20 >>> I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work.=20 >>> Bridges and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we=20 >>> meanwhile transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should be > some IEEE liaison interaction here. >>>=20 >>> I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things=20 >>> that are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no=20= >>> mention of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. >>=20 >> As a topology model, the L2 topology model is focusing on the = overview of > connectivity between the network entities from layer-2's perspective, = thus > the detailed config and operational information of interfaces will not = be > covered in this model, only those which are used as the identifiers of = nodes > and termination-points are included. We will take a look at whether = the > interface model should be referenced here.=20 >>=20 >=20 > Are you saying you will take out all objects that are interface = specific? I > think there should be text explaining the relationship to the > ietf-interfaces model and extensions of it. >=20 >> The chassis-id here has the same meaning as it is in LLDP. Currently = its > type is set to mac-address as one common implementation. This could be > updated with a more generic type. >=20 > Well, it is simply under specified what it is. And there is the model = of > physical entities where a chassis has a specific meaning. Anyway, = there > needs to be more relationship sections explaining all this. But at = this > point, many things are simply too vague to understand what they mean = and it > is unclear where the information would come from. >=20 > /js >=20 > --=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >=20 > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >=20 From nobody Tue Apr 7 07:28:03 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DF4C1A8894 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:28:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.055 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.055 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5X6FGoXAf1MP for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:28:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (hhc-web3.hickoryhill-consulting.com [64.9.205.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8EF11A8868 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:28:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=forwardok (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=74.43.47.142; From: "Susan Hares" To: "'Thomas D. Nadeau'" References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> <266BDF8B-6C86-4B9C-9A49-DAAFE902E726@lucidvision.com> In-Reply-To: <266BDF8B-6C86-4B9C-9A49-DAAFE902E726@lucidvision.com> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:27:36 -0400 Message-ID: <001401d0713e$fef5ff70$fce1fe50$@ndzh.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQKGyYQkyVg3yD7ZXWu2oc2gzWs4vwFhHGuIAOxJ8L4BOdVPhgHHUgIqAM6bo0ebpAF2YA== X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com Archived-At: Cc: "'Dongjie $Jimmy$'" , 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' , i2rs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 14:28:02 -0000 Tom: Thank you for reminding people of the Entity-MIB Yang Model. Sue -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas D. Nadeau Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 10:17 AM To: Susan Hares Cc: Dongjie (Jimmy); Juergen Schoenwaelder; i2rs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt > On Apr 7, 2015:9:39 AM, at 9:39 AM, Susan Hares wrote: > > > Juergen: > > This is good feedback on the L2 topology versus interface module. > > Stating "taking out all objects that are interface specific" is a bit > broad, but in principle specifics that belong to interfaces should be > in the interfaces module. The L2 specification is part of a virtual > topology that reflects interfaces, links, nodes, and terminating > points. There will be some references to the virtual principles. Some > things chassis-id imply a shared group resources (interfaces in a > chassis) which creates a shared risk group. The virtual topology > needs to indicate which interfaces are within a shared risk group. As > Jie has mentioned, he will take into account your comments in the next revision of the draft. I agree with Juergen on the interfaces point. I also want to remind folks that the chassis-related stuff are being broken off and put into the effort to build the Entity-MIB Yang Model. There is a design team that I kicked off in NETMOD to do this work. Jimmy is part of that DT and should be able to sync up with that effort. --Tom > I have already spoken to some IEEE people about who to talk to about > the LLDP yang modules. It appears the appropriate group is the 802.1 > working group, and I will send a note to the chair today. > > Sue > > -----Original Message----- > From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen > Schoenwaelder > Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 5:45 AM > To: Dongjie (Jimmy) > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Susan Hares > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt > > On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:36:18AM +0000, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: >> Hi Juergen, >> >> Thanks for your comments on this L2 topology model. Please see some > replies inline. >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder >>> [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] >>> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:18 PM >>> To: Susan Hares >>> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy) >>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for >>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: >>>> This begins a 2 week adoption call for >>>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. >>>> >>>> Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and >>>> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query >>>> information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: >>>> >>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topolog >>>> y/ >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. >>> Bridges and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we >>> meanwhile transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should be > some IEEE liaison interaction here. >>> >>> I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things >>> that are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no >>> mention of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. >> >> As a topology model, the L2 topology model is focusing on the >> overview of > connectivity between the network entities from layer-2's perspective, > thus the detailed config and operational information of interfaces > will not be covered in this model, only those which are used as the > identifiers of nodes and termination-points are included. We will take > a look at whether the interface model should be referenced here. >> > > Are you saying you will take out all objects that are interface > specific? I think there should be text explaining the relationship to > the ietf-interfaces model and extensions of it. > >> The chassis-id here has the same meaning as it is in LLDP. Currently >> its > type is set to mac-address as one common implementation. This could be > updated with a more generic type. > > Well, it is simply under specified what it is. And there is the model > of physical entities where a chassis has a specific meaning. Anyway, > there needs to be more relationship sections explaining all this. But > at this point, many things are simply too vague to understand what > they mean and it is unclear where the information would come from. > > /js > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs From nobody Tue Apr 7 10:56:58 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 380291B3934 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:56:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.979 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X-Crs_FUylm7 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:56:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f178.google.com (mail-lb0-f178.google.com [209.85.217.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB1871B3935 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:56:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbbuc2 with SMTP id uc2so45305048lbb.2 for ; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 10:56:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=gyNC26+vXO3bmhCrRpMoAatWC/xsG3elxbLnb5ZQbWI=; b=g38MJLTSnD80WGjWrONkpNZ4ShoKfqwRfPj+mBgaUkIwBCglEJZfzjcKrNp5jetXMK ixbBZ+BMKbSH25bJa5GOTt63eHK/GeT3IanSRY53Joddg6cDallWi+jRgkGlE9MexYvX cHfn7GwcSvZoOOEPkufpJ+DNPVZcHd4EEi9WeacoL3D62O5GVCy5BPHbuRrvevnivONt p4buHj89HTi9/A0Zjbgj01ezW+P0DRM+xAvvhxg86Dto2C50lNKqVJ1sLrKgeZAC34y5 j9pbdWMoHU+SzyboNNfAYyHGqKZcegKOtJhad8XRKIWT7vWg5/wrT0mtvq9ndWHHfJt7 QFZg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl6ZluT+HCjMd031F8iA+8ycITAkX5E+E3CL06gYue9wRGpvRUpkc7kQ6mf1LGHqfQNr65f MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.77.234 with SMTP id v10mr19175649lbw.119.1428429411311; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 10:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.200.102 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:56:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <266BDF8B-6C86-4B9C-9A49-DAAFE902E726@lucidvision.com> References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> <266BDF8B-6C86-4B9C-9A49-DAAFE902E726@lucidvision.com> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 10:56:51 -0700 Message-ID: From: Andy Bierman To: "Thomas D. Nadeau" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "Dongjie $Jimmy$" , Juergen Schoenwaelder , Susan Hares , "i2rs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 17:56:56 -0000 On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Thomas D. Nadeau wrote: > >> On Apr 7, 2015:9:39 AM, at 9:39 AM, Susan Hares wrote: >> >> >> Juergen: >> >> This is good feedback on the L2 topology versus interface module. >> >> Stating "taking out all objects that are interface specific" is a bit broad, >> but in principle specifics that belong to interfaces should be in the >> interfaces module. The L2 specification is part of a virtual topology that >> reflects interfaces, links, nodes, and terminating points. There will be >> some references to the virtual principles. Some things chassis-id imply a >> shared group resources (interfaces in a chassis) which creates a shared risk >> group. The virtual topology needs to indicate which interfaces are within a >> shared risk group. As Jie has mentioned, he will take into account your >> comments in the next revision of the draft. > > I agree with Juergen on the interfaces point. I also want to remind folks > that the chassis-related stuff are being broken off and put into the > effort to build the Entity-MIB Yang Model. There is a design team that > I kicked off in NETMOD to do this work. Jimmy is part of that DT and > should be able to sync up with that effort. > Hi, The design team met for several hours in Dallas. I will be producing an initial draft based on those discussions. I will send meeting notes to the WG mailing list first. We most focused on how to adapt the existing ENTITY MIB modules, not on missing data that I2RS needs beyond the adapted MIB modules. > --Tom Andy > > >> I have already spoken to some IEEE people about who to talk to about the >> LLDP yang modules. It appears the appropriate group is the 802.1 working >> group, and I will send a note to the chair today. >> >> Sue >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder >> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 5:45 AM >> To: Dongjie (Jimmy) >> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Susan Hares >> Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for >> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >> >> On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:36:18AM +0000, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: >>> Hi Juergen, >>> >>> Thanks for your comments on this L2 topology model. Please see some >> replies inline. >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder >>>> [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] >>>> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:18 PM >>>> To: Susan Hares >>>> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy) >>>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for >>>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: >>>>> This begins a 2 week adoption call for >>>>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. >>>>> >>>>> Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and >>>>> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query >>>>> information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: >>>>> >>>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topolog >>>>> y/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. >>>> Bridges and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we >>>> meanwhile transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should be >> some IEEE liaison interaction here. >>>> >>>> I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things >>>> that are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no >>>> mention of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. >>> >>> As a topology model, the L2 topology model is focusing on the overview of >> connectivity between the network entities from layer-2's perspective, thus >> the detailed config and operational information of interfaces will not be >> covered in this model, only those which are used as the identifiers of nodes >> and termination-points are included. We will take a look at whether the >> interface model should be referenced here. >>> >> >> Are you saying you will take out all objects that are interface specific? I >> think there should be text explaining the relationship to the >> ietf-interfaces model and extensions of it. >> >>> The chassis-id here has the same meaning as it is in LLDP. Currently its >> type is set to mac-address as one common implementation. This could be >> updated with a more generic type. >> >> Well, it is simply under specified what it is. And there is the model of >> physical entities where a chassis has a specific meaning. Anyway, there >> needs to be more relationship sections explaining all this. But at this >> point, many things are simply too vague to understand what they mean and it >> is unclear where the information would come from. >> >> /js >> >> -- >> Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH >> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany >> Fax: +49 421 200 3103 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> i2rs mailing list >> i2rs@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >> >> _______________________________________________ >> i2rs mailing list >> i2rs@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >> > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs From nobody Tue Apr 7 12:23:24 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A58101B359B for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 12:23:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.895 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I_DnmlYSc9Pd for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 12:23:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lucidvision.com (unknown [50.255.148.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC4C51B3B21 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 12:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.108] (unknown [50.255.148.181]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6435F321550A; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:23:20 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 $2070.6$) From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:23:20 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> <266BDF8B-6C86-4B9C-9A49-DAAFE902E726@lucidvision.com> To: Andy Bierman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) Archived-At: Cc: "Dongjie $Jimmy$" , Juergen Schoenwaelder , Susan Hares , "i2rs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 19:23:22 -0000 > On Apr 7, 2015:1:56 PM, at 1:56 PM, Andy Bierman = wrote: >=20 > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Thomas D. Nadeau > wrote: >>=20 >>> On Apr 7, 2015:9:39 AM, at 9:39 AM, Susan Hares = wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Juergen: >>>=20 >>> This is good feedback on the L2 topology versus interface module. >>>=20 >>> Stating "taking out all objects that are interface specific" is a = bit broad, >>> but in principle specifics that belong to interfaces should be in = the >>> interfaces module. The L2 specification is part of a virtual = topology that >>> reflects interfaces, links, nodes, and terminating points. There = will be >>> some references to the virtual principles. Some things chassis-id = imply a >>> shared group resources (interfaces in a chassis) which creates a = shared risk >>> group. The virtual topology needs to indicate which interfaces are = within a >>> shared risk group. As Jie has mentioned, he will take into account = your >>> comments in the next revision of the draft. >>=20 >> I agree with Juergen on the interfaces point. I also want to = remind folks >> that the chassis-related stuff are being broken off and put into the >> effort to build the Entity-MIB Yang Model. There is a design team = that >> I kicked off in NETMOD to do this work. Jimmy is part of that DT and >> should be able to sync up with that effort. >>=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > The design team met for several hours in Dallas. > I will be producing an initial draft based on those discussions. > I will send meeting notes to the WG mailing list first. Fantastic and thanks!=20 > We most focused on how to adapt the existing ENTITY MIB modules, > not on missing data that I2RS needs beyond the adapted MIB modules. That is cool. We can add that as we iterate.=20 --Tom >=20 >=20 >> --Tom >=20 > Andy >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> I have already spoken to some IEEE people about who to talk to about = the >>> LLDP yang modules. It appears the appropriate group is the 802.1 = working >>> group, and I will send a note to the chair today. >>>=20 >>> Sue >>>=20 >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen = Schoenwaelder >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 5:45 AM >>> To: Dongjie (Jimmy) >>> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Susan Hares >>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for >>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >>>=20 >>> On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:36:18AM +0000, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: >>>> Hi Juergen, >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks for your comments on this L2 topology model. Please see some >>> replies inline. >>>>=20 >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder >>>>> [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] >>>>> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:18 PM >>>>> To: Susan Hares >>>>> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy) >>>>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for >>>>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: >>>>>> This begins a 2 week adoption call for >>>>>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and >>>>>> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to = query >>>>>> information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> = http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topolog >>>>>> y/ >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> >>>>>=20 >>>>> I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. >>>>> Bridges and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we >>>>> meanwhile transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should = be >>> some IEEE liaison interaction here. >>>>>=20 >>>>> I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things >>>>> that are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is = no >>>>> mention of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. >>>>=20 >>>> As a topology model, the L2 topology model is focusing on the = overview of >>> connectivity between the network entities from layer-2's = perspective, thus >>> the detailed config and operational information of interfaces will = not be >>> covered in this model, only those which are used as the identifiers = of nodes >>> and termination-points are included. We will take a look at whether = the >>> interface model should be referenced here. >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Are you saying you will take out all objects that are interface = specific? I >>> think there should be text explaining the relationship to the >>> ietf-interfaces model and extensions of it. >>>=20 >>>> The chassis-id here has the same meaning as it is in LLDP. = Currently its >>> type is set to mac-address as one common implementation. This could = be >>> updated with a more generic type. >>>=20 >>> Well, it is simply under specified what it is. And there is the = model of >>> physical entities where a chassis has a specific meaning. Anyway, = there >>> needs to be more relationship sections explaining all this. But at = this >>> point, many things are simply too vague to understand what they mean = and it >>> is unclear where the information would come from. >>>=20 >>> /js >>>=20 >>> -- >>> Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH >>> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | = Germany >>> Fax: +49 421 200 3103 >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> i2rs mailing list >>> i2rs@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> i2rs mailing list >>> i2rs@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >>>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> i2rs mailing list >> i2rs@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >=20 From nobody Tue Apr 7 18:56:05 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D9C01B2AF2 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 18:56:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8zWfT6Kdfr2o for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 18:56:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20C251B2AE2 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 18:55:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BRD52943; Wed, 08 Apr 2015 01:55:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from NKGEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.33) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 02:55:53 +0100 Received: from NKGEML512-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.7.135]) by nkgeml402-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.33]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 09:55:49 +0800 From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" To: "Thomas D. Nadeau" , Susan Hares Thread-Topic: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt Thread-Index: AQHQcHzhIwYkRMPLF0GDnvEoA+nLIZ1BPrvQ//+JGQCAAEGHAIAACrQAgAFG83A= Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 01:55:48 +0000 Message-ID: <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFF8D8@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <009001d0706b$3877a0c0$a966e240$@ndzh.com> <20150406151750.GA90144@elstar.local> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92757CFE04C@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20150407094434.GD7594@elstar.local> <00ca01d07138$398d6760$aca83620$@ndzh.com> <266BDF8B-6C86-4B9C-9A49-DAAFE902E726@lucidvision.com> In-Reply-To: <266BDF8B-6C86-4B9C-9A49-DAAFE902E726@lucidvision.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.97.131] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "i2rs@ietf.org" , Juergen Schoenwaelder Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 01:56:03 -0000 Hi Tom, > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas D. Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@lucidvision.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 10:17 PM > To: Susan Hares > Cc: Juergen Schoenwaelder; Dongjie (Jimmy); i2rs@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt >=20 >=20 > > On Apr 7, 2015:9:39 AM, at 9:39 AM, Susan Hares wrote= : > > > > > > Juergen: > > > > This is good feedback on the L2 topology versus interface module. > > > > Stating "taking out all objects that are interface specific" is a bit > > broad, but in principle specifics that belong to interfaces should be > > in the interfaces module. The L2 specification is part of a virtual > > topology that reflects interfaces, links, nodes, and terminating > > points. There will be some references to the virtual principles. Some > > things chassis-id imply a shared group resources (interfaces in a > > chassis) which creates a shared risk group. The virtual topology > > needs to indicate which interfaces are within a shared risk group. As > > Jie has mentioned, he will take into account your comments in the next > revision of the draft. >=20 > I agree with Juergen on the interfaces point. I also want to remind folk= s > that the chassis-related stuff are being broken off and put into the effo= rt to > build the Entity-MIB Yang Model. There is a design team that I kicked of= f in > NETMOD to do this work. Jimmy is part of that DT and should be able to sy= nc up > with that effort. >=20 > --Tom Agree that the chassis-related stuff needs to be specified in the entity-mi= b yang model, and the identifiers used in the topology drafts will sync up = with that model. -Jie >=20 > > I have already spoken to some IEEE people about who to talk to about > > the LLDP yang modules. It appears the appropriate group is the 802.1 > > working group, and I will send a note to the chair today. > > > > Sue > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen > > Schoenwaelder > > Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 5:45 AM > > To: Dongjie (Jimmy) > > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Susan Hares > > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > > draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt > > > > On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:36:18AM +0000, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: > >> Hi Juergen, > >> > >> Thanks for your comments on this L2 topology model. Please see some > > replies inline. > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder > >>> [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] > >>> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 11:18 PM > >>> To: Susan Hares > >>> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy) > >>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG adoption call for > >>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01.txt > >>> > >>> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:11:39AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > >>>> This begins a 2 week adoption call for > >>>> draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topology-01. > >>>> > >>>> Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and > >>>> discuss how this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query > >>>> information about L2 topology. The draft can be found at: > >>>> > >>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-i2rs-l2-network-topolog > >>>> y/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> I wonder how this will interwork with any possible IEEE work. > >>> Bridges and VLANs had been modeled as MIBs back in a day but we > >>> meanwhile transferred work all over to IEEE. I think there should be > > some IEEE liaison interaction here. > >>> > >>> I also wonder to what extend this data model is repeating things > >>> that are already in the interfaces abstraction we have. There is no > >>> mention of RFC 7223 yet there is overlap. > >> > >> As a topology model, the L2 topology model is focusing on the > >> overview of > > connectivity between the network entities from layer-2's perspective, > > thus the detailed config and operational information of interfaces > > will not be covered in this model, only those which are used as the > > identifiers of nodes and termination-points are included. We will take > > a look at whether the interface model should be referenced here. > >> > > > > Are you saying you will take out all objects that are interface > > specific? I think there should be text explaining the relationship to > > the ietf-interfaces model and extensions of it. > > > >> The chassis-id here has the same meaning as it is in LLDP. Currently > >> its > > type is set to mac-address as one common implementation. This could be > > updated with a more generic type. > > > > Well, it is simply under specified what it is. And there is the model > > of physical entities where a chassis has a specific meaning. Anyway, > > there needs to be more relationship sections explaining all this. But > > at this point, many things are simply too vague to understand what > > they mean and it is unclear where the information would come from. > > > > /js > > > > -- > > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | > Germany > > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > i2rs mailing list > > i2rs@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > > > _______________________________________________ > > i2rs mailing list > > i2rs@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > From nobody Thu Apr 9 16:30:03 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB06E1A90EC for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:30:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oYhkGqiqT_UO for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:29:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0621.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::621]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 412891B36E6 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:29:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CY1PR0401MB1019.namprd04.prod.outlook.com (25.160.161.11) by CY1PR0401MB1020.namprd04.prod.outlook.com (25.160.161.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.130.23; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 23:29:39 +0000 Received: from CY1PR0401MB1019.namprd04.prod.outlook.com ([25.160.161.11]) by CY1PR0401MB1019.namprd04.prod.outlook.com ([25.160.161.11]) with mapi id 15.01.0130.020; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 23:29:39 +0000 From: Hariharan Ananthakrishnan To: Susan Hares , "i2rs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) Thread-Index: AdBwatJV4sji5TDgTMm0eUCyRO/fZwCd4xSA Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 23:29:38 +0000 Message-ID: References: <007d01d0706a$d7c2da60$87488f20$@ndzh.com> In-Reply-To: <007d01d0706a$d7c2da60$87488f20$@ndzh.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [38.99.127.66] authentication-results: ndzh.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR0401MB1020; x-forefront-antispam-report: BMV:1; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(5423002)(479174004)(2950100001)(2900100001)(99286002)(19617315012)(19625215002)(33656002)(83716003)(54356999)(19300405004)(36756003)(50986999)(46102003)(76176999)(230783001)(92566002)(19580405001)(62966003)(19580395003)(77156002)(82746002)(2656002)(66066001)(86362001)(122556002)(2501003)(16236675004)(40100003)(87936001)(15975445007)(102836002)(104396002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR0401MB1020; H:CY1PR0401MB1019.namprd04.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(5002010)(5005006); SRVR:CY1PR0401MB1020; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR0401MB1020; x-forefront-prvs: 0541031FF6 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B5E44084B2E3444A8A9F9474AE3156F1packetdesigncom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: packetdesign.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Apr 2015 23:29:38.8767 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 1df5b6db-3686-4e87-9323-024e5bfe00f0 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR0401MB1020 Archived-At: Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas' Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 23:30:01 -0000 --_000_B5E44084B2E3444A8A9F9474AE3156F1packetdesigncom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 U3VwcG9ydCBhcyBjby1hdXRob3IuDQoNCi0gSGFyaQ0KDQpGcm9tOiBTdXNhbiBIYXJlcw0KRGF0 ZTogTW9uZGF5LCA2IEFwcmlsIDIwMTUgMDY6MDgNClRvOiAiaTJyc0BpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86 aTJyc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4iDQpDYzogJ0plZmZyZXkgSGFhcycNClN1YmplY3Q6IFtpMnJzXSAyIHdl ZWsgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBBZG9wdGlvbiBjYWxsIGZvciBkcmFmdC1jbGVtbS1pMnJzLXlhbmct bDMtdG9wb2xneS0wMC50eHQgKDQvNi8yMDE1IHRvIDQvMjAvMjE1KQ0KDQpUaGlzIGJlZ2lucyBh IDIgd2VlayBhZG9wdGlvbiBjYWxsIGZvciBkcmFmdC1jbGVtbS1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDMtdG9wby0w MC50eHQuDQoNClBsZWFzZSBpbmRpY2F0ZSBpbiB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRzIOKAnHN1cHBvcnTigJ0g b3Ig4oCcbm8gc3VwcG9ydOKAnSBhbmQgZGlzY3VzcyBob3cgdGhpcyBkcmFmdCB3aWxsIGFsbG93 IEkyUlMgY2xpZW50LWFnZW50IHBhaXJzIHRvIHF1ZXJ5IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGFib3V0IEwzIHRv cG9sb2d5LiAgVGhlIGRyYWZ0IGNhbiBiZSBmb3VuZCBhdDoNCg0KaHR0cDovL2RhdGF0cmFja2Vy LmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1jbGVtbS1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDMtdG9wby8NCg0KU3VlIEhhcmVz IGFuZCBKZWZmIEhhYXMNCg0K --_000_B5E44084B2E3444A8A9F9474AE3156F1packetdesigncom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <1A58F0554E0C4B45A0A6726E4B3F532F@namprd04.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAx MXB4OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogVmVyZGFuYSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+U3Vw cG9ydCBhcyBjby1hdXRob3IuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4tIEhhcmk8 L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGlkPSJNQUNfT1VUTE9PS19TSUdOQVRVUkUiPjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8c3BhbiBpZD0iT0xLX1NSQ19CT0RZX1NF Q1RJT04iPg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsgZm9udC1zaXplOjEycHQ7 IHRleHQtYWxpZ246bGVmdDsgY29sb3I6YmxhY2s7IEJPUkRFUi1CT1RUT006IG1lZGl1bSBub25l OyBCT1JERVItTEVGVDogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IFBBRERJTkctQk9UVE9NOiAwaW47IFBBRERJTkct TEVGVDogMGluOyBQQURESU5HLVJJR0hUOiAwaW47IEJPUkRFUi1UT1A6ICNiNWM0ZGYgMXB0IHNv bGlkOyBCT1JERVItUklHSFQ6IG1lZGl1bSBub25lOyBQQURESU5HLVRPUDogM3B0Ij4NCjxzcGFu IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5Gcm9tOiA8L3NwYW4+U3VzYW4gSGFyZXM8YnI+DQo8 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+RGF0ZTogPC9zcGFuPk1vbmRheSwgNiBBcHJp bCAyMDE1IDA2OjA4PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPlRvOiA8L3Nw YW4+JnF1b3Q7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmkycnNAaWV0Zi5vcmciPmkycnNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+ JnF1b3Q7PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPkNjOiA8L3NwYW4+J0pl ZmZyZXkgSGFhcyc8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+U3ViamVjdDog PC9zcGFuPltpMnJzXSAyIHdlZWsgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBBZG9wdGlvbiBjYWxsIGZvciBkcmFm dC1jbGVtbS1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDMtdG9wb2xneS0wMC50eHQgKDQvNi8yMDE1IHRvIDQvMjAvMjE1 KTxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206 b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6 d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8x Mi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcvVFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8bWV0YSBu YW1lPSJHZW5lcmF0b3IiIGNvbnRlbnQ9Ik1pY3Jvc29mdCBXb3JkIDE0IChmaWx0ZXJlZCBtZWRp dW0pIj4NCjxzdHlsZT48IS0tDQovKiBGb250IERlZmluaXRpb25zICovDQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJ e2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYW1icmlhIE1hdGgiOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgNCA1IDMgNSA0IDYgMyAy IDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgMTUg NSAyIDIgMiA0IDMgMiA0O30NCi8qIFN0eWxlIERlZmluaXRpb25zICovDQpwLk1zb05vcm1hbCwg bGkuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBkaXYuTXNvTm9ybWFsDQoJe21hcmdpbjowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRv bTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJz YW5zLXNlcmlmIjt9DQphOmxpbmssIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlwZXJsaW5rDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlv cml0eTo5OTsNCgljb2xvcjpibHVlOw0KCXRleHQtZGVjb3JhdGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0KYTp2 aXNpdGVkLCBzcGFuLk1zb0h5cGVybGlua0ZvbGxvd2VkDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5 OTsNCgljb2xvcjpwdXJwbGU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9uOnVuZGVybGluZTt9DQpzcGFuLkVt YWlsU3R5bGUxNw0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpwZXJzb25hbC1jb21wb3NlOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7DQoJY29sb3I6d2luZG93dGV4dDt9DQouTXNvQ2hw RGVmYXVsdA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpleHBvcnQtb25seTsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2Fs aWJyaSIsInNhbnMtc2VyaWYiO30NCkBwYWdlIFdvcmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtzaXplOjguNWluIDEx LjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW46MS4waW4gMS4waW4gMS4waW4gMS4waW47fQ0KZGl2LldvcmRTZWN0aW9u MQ0KCXtwYWdlOldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMTt9DQotLT48L3N0eWxlPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48 eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVkZWZhdWx0cyB2OmV4dD0iZWRpdCIgc3BpZG1heD0iMTAyNiIgLz4NCjwv eG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQg djpleHQ9ImVkaXQiPg0KPG86aWRtYXAgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiIGRhdGE9IjEiIC8+DQo8L286c2hh cGVsYXlvdXQ+PC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+DQo8ZGl2IGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBsaW5rPSJibHVl IiB2bGluaz0icHVycGxlIj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj5UaGlzIGJlZ2lucyBhIDIgd2VlayBhZG9wdGlvbiBjYWxsIGZvciBkcmFmdC1j bGVtbS1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDMtdG9wby0wMC50eHQuPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPlBs ZWFzZSBpbmRpY2F0ZSBpbiB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRzIOKAnHN1cHBvcnTigJ0gb3Ig4oCcbm8gc3Vw cG9ydOKAnSBhbmQgZGlzY3VzcyBob3cgdGhpcyBkcmFmdCB3aWxsIGFsbG93IEkyUlMgY2xpZW50 LWFnZW50IHBhaXJzIHRvIHF1ZXJ5IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGFib3V0IEwzIHRvcG9sb2d5LiZuYnNw OyBUaGUgZHJhZnQgY2FuIGJlIGZvdW5kIGF0Og0KPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxh IGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtY2xlbW0taTJycy15 YW5nLWwzLXRvcG8vIj5odHRwOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LWNsZW1t LWkycnMteWFuZy1sMy10b3BvLzwvYT48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+U3VlIEhhcmVz IGFuZCBKZWZmIEhhYXM8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+ Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9zcGFuPg0KPC9ib2R5 Pg0KPC9odG1sPg0K --_000_B5E44084B2E3444A8A9F9474AE3156F1packetdesigncom_-- From nobody Thu Apr 9 17:44:33 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 635921B380E for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 17:44:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.76 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.76 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ujto_j7LD9_C for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 17:44:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5CA01B381F for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 17:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BRF71079; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 00:44:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEML434-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.225) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 01:44:14 +0100 Received: from SZXEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.90]) by szxeml434-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.225]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 08:44:06 +0800 From: wangzitao To: Susan Hares , "i2rs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) Thread-Index: AdBwatJV4sji5TDgTMm0eUCyRO/fZwCvFRyA Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 00:44:06 +0000 Message-ID: References: <007d01d0706a$d7c2da60$87488f20$@ndzh.com> In-Reply-To: <007d01d0706a$d7c2da60$87488f20$@ndzh.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.131] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E6BC9BBCBCACC246846FC685F9FF41EAC017B6szxeml501mbxchina_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas' Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 00:44:25 -0000 --_000_E6BC9BBCBCACC246846FC685F9FF41EAC017B6szxeml501mbxchina_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 U3VwcG9ydA0KDQotLU1pY2hhZWwNCg0Kt6K8/sjLOiBpMnJzIFttYWlsdG86aTJycy1ib3VuY2Vz QGlldGYub3JnXSC0+rHtIFN1c2FuIEhhcmVzDQq3osvNyrG85DogMjAxNcTqNNTCNsjVIDIxOjA5 DQrK1bz+yMs6IGkycnNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCrOty806ICdKZWZmcmV5IEhhYXMnDQrW98ziOiBbaTJy c10gMiB3ZWVrIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAgQWRvcHRpb24gY2FsbCBmb3IgZHJhZnQtY2xlbW0taTJy cy15YW5nLWwzLXRvcG9sZ3ktMDAudHh0ICg0LzYvMjAxNSB0byA0LzIwLzIxNSkNCg0KVGhpcyBi ZWdpbnMgYSAyIHdlZWsgYWRvcHRpb24gY2FsbCBmb3IgZHJhZnQtY2xlbW0taTJycy15YW5nLWwz LXRvcG8tMDAudHh0Lg0KDQpQbGVhc2UgaW5kaWNhdGUgaW4geW91ciBjb21tZW50cyChsHN1cHBv cnShsSBvciChsG5vIHN1cHBvcnShsSBhbmQgZGlzY3VzcyBob3cgdGhpcyBkcmFmdCB3aWxsIGFs bG93IEkyUlMgY2xpZW50LWFnZW50IHBhaXJzIHRvIHF1ZXJ5IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGFib3V0IEwz IHRvcG9sb2d5LiAgVGhlIGRyYWZ0IGNhbiBiZSBmb3VuZCBhdDoNCg0KaHR0cDovL2RhdGF0cmFj a2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1jbGVtbS1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDMtdG9wby8NCg0KU3VlIEhh cmVzIGFuZCBKZWZmIEhhYXMNCg0K --_000_E6BC9BBCBCACC246846FC685F9FF41EAC017B6szxeml501mbxchina_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Support

--Michael

=B7=A2=BC=FE=C8=CB: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bou= nces@ietf.org] =B4=FA=B1=ED = Susan Hares
=B7=A2=CB=CD= =CA=B1=BC=E4: 2015=C4=EA4=D4=C2<= span lang=3D"EN-US">6=C8=D5 21:09
=CA=D5=BC=FE=C8=CB: i2rs@ietf.org
=B3=AD=CB=CD: 'Jeffrey Haas'
=D6=F7=CC=E2: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-to= polgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215)

This begins a 2 week adoption c= all for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topo-00.txt.

Please indicate in your comment= s =A1=B0support=A1=B1 or =A1=B0no support=A1=B1 and discuss how this draft = will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query information about L3 topology.&= nbsp; The draft can be found at:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc= /draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topo/

Sue Hares and Jeff Haas

--_000_E6BC9BBCBCACC246846FC685F9FF41EAC017B6szxeml501mbxchina_-- From nobody Thu Apr 9 19:01:45 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19D2B1A9007 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 19:01:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nnBOmSU-bvlH for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 19:01:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55A531A9005 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 19:01:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4515; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1428631302; x=1429840902; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=2OsOhxkxNS5q6nQ0qxQlbmK00B90NxLfCGOfqIMukAw=; b=OC/qlsZ9Snm391SUoJRCbTzRIy5ts8mG1ZArkADkq4Q4Ke9aJ11WtjNY xgsMBOMENpfjtleV5VHy6PIRt/WQp5LN1bs0/7qflaUIaJ+N8lTtRfKC3 JPTCLYMz0V63NPwRCzEoJZ8UEjKUIzxFc84qOTn75zgx0jvhcXkXLXYiU A=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DCBQDGLSdV/5tdJa1cgkVDUlwFtjGNbjOBU4YBAoFFOhIBAQEBAQEBfYQfAQEBBB0QTBACAQgOAwQBAQsZBAcyFAkIAQEEAQ0FCIgiDc5UAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBF4srhEsxBgGDF4EWBZEBg3iHMDqCfYxDg0sigjOBPG+BRH8BAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,554,1422921600"; d="scan'208,217";a="139902700" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Apr 2015 02:01:41 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x09.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x09.cisco.com [173.36.12.83]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t3A21fOW016016 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 10 Apr 2015 02:01:41 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x05.cisco.com ([169.254.15.96]) by xhc-aln-x09.cisco.com ([173.36.12.83]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 21:01:41 -0500 From: "Alexander Clemm (alex)" To: Susan Hares , "i2rs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) Thread-Index: AdBwatJV4sji5TDgTMm0eUCyRO/fZwCx3Ihw Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 02:01:41 +0000 Message-ID: References: <007d01d0706a$d7c2da60$87488f20$@ndzh.com> In-Reply-To: <007d01d0706a$d7c2da60$87488f20$@ndzh.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.154.204.175] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DBC595ED2346914F9F81D17DD5C32B571DAE8763xmbrcdx05ciscoc_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas' Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 02:01:44 -0000 --_000_DBC595ED2346914F9F81D17DD5C32B571DAE8763xmbrcdx05ciscoc_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable support as coauthor From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 6:09 AM To: i2rs@ietf.org Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas' Subject: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yan= g-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) This begins a 2 week adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topo-00.txt= . Please indicate in your comments "support" or "no support" and discuss how = this draft will allow I2RS client-agent pairs to query information about L3= topology. The draft can be found at: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topo/ Sue Hares and Jeff Haas --_000_DBC595ED2346914F9F81D17DD5C32B571DAE8763xmbrcdx05ciscoc_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

support as coauthor

From: i2rs [ma= ilto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 6:09 AM
To: i2rs@ietf.org
Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas'
Subject: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i= 2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215)

This begins a 2 week adoption call for draft-clemm-i= 2rs-yang-l3-topo-00.txt.

Please indicate in your comments “support̶= 1; or “no support” and discuss how this draft will allow I2RS c= lient-agent pairs to query information about L3 topology. The draft c= an be found at:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-clemm-i2rs-yan= g-l3-topo/

Sue Hares and Jeff Haas

--_000_DBC595ED2346914F9F81D17DD5C32B571DAE8763xmbrcdx05ciscoc_-- From nobody Thu Apr 9 23:02:35 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B62461ACE43 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 23:02:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oZVkEY-47tW1 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 23:02:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B39E1ACE41 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 23:02:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BRF88877; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 06:02:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.70) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 07:02:27 +0100 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.219]) by szxema411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 14:02:20 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: Susan Hares , "i2rs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) Thread-Index: AdBwatJV4sji5TDgTMm0eUCyRO/fZwC6Qvdg Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 06:02:19 +0000 Message-ID: References: <007d01d0706a$d7c2da60$87488f20$@ndzh.com> In-Reply-To: <007d01d0706a$d7c2da60$87488f20$@ndzh.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.97.199] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE28B41727ESZXEMA510MBXchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas' Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week Working Group Adoption call for draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-l3-topolgy-00.txt (4/6/2015 to 4/20/215) X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System $IRS$" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: