From nobody Sun Oct 13 23:41:02 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E54A1200CD for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 23:41:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 zGEifxWFAAFy for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 23:40:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C56C412006E for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 23:40:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id DD35925D6A1835968B17 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:40:54 +0100 (IST) Received: from lhreml707-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.56) by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:40:54 +0100 Received: from lhreml707-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.56) by lhreml707-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:40:54 +0100 Received: from DGGEML422-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.39) by lhreml707-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:40:53 +0100 Received: from DGGEML511-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.72]) by dggeml422-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.39]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 14:40:50 +0800 From: Qin Wu To: "ludwig@clemm.org" , "i2rs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Questions on Network types in draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo Thread-Index: AdWCVabBIvwzN7pqSX6bVR3gRA+8kg== Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 06:40:49 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.134.31.203] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA936A55Fdggeml511mbxchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Subject: [i2rs] Questions on Network types in draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 14 Oct 2019 06:41:01 -0000 --_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA936A55Fdggeml511mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Alex and RFC8345 authors: As we know, node, link, termination points are three basic elements in the = network topology model, network-types defined in ietf-network model indicat= e certain type of the network, no definition of node-type and link-type in = network topology model, see quoted text in section 4.1 of RFC8345 " A network has a certain type, such as L2, L3, OSPF, or IS-IS. A network can even have multiple types simultaneously. The type or types are captured underneath the container "network-types". In this model, it serves merely as an augmentation target; network-specific modules will later introduce new data nodes to represent new network types below this target, i.e., will insert them below "network-types" via YANG augmentation. " However in some cases, there might be multiple tunnels between the two node= s or endpoints, it seems network-types is not sufficient to indicate various type of tunnel technology between two nodes, especially when a netw= ork can have multiple network type simultaneously. So I believe link type or tunnel type should be added as link attributes of= extension of ietf-network-topology model. Let me know if my understanding is correct. -Qin --_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA936A55Fdggeml511mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi, Alex and RFC8345 authors:

As we know, node, link, termina= tion points are three basic elements in the network topology model, network= -types defined in ietf-network model indicate certain type of the network, = no definition of node-type and link-type in network topology model, see

quoted text in section 4.1 of R= FC8345

“

A network has a certain type, s= uch as L2, L3, OSPF, or IS-IS.  A

network can even have multiple = types simultaneously.  The type or

types are captured underneath t= he container "network-types".  In this

model, it serves merely as an a= ugmentation target; network-specific

modules will later introduce ne= w data nodes to represent new network

types below this target, i.e., = will insert them below "network-types"

via YANG augmentation.

”

However in some cases, there mi= ght be multiple tunnels between the two nodes or endpoints, it seems networ= k-types is not sufficient to indicate

various type of tunnel technolo= gy between two nodes, especially when a network can have multiple network t= ype simultaneously.

So I believe link type or tunne= l type should be added as link attributes of extension of ietf-network-topo= logy model.

Let me know if my understanding= is correct.

 

-Qin

--_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA936A55Fdggeml511mbxchi_-- From nobody Tue Oct 15 01:28:36 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C0C41200A4 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:28:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.198 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 WksZIsnoAikk for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blaze.cs.jhu.edu (blaze.cs.jhu.edu [128.220.13.50]) (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 862E012009C for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web3.cs.jhu.edu (web3.cs.jhu.edu [128.220.13.76]) (user=soudeh mech=LOGIN bits=0) by blaze.cs.jhu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x9F8STOe041726 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 04:28:30 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 04:28:29 -0400 From: Soudeh Ghorbani To: i2rs@ietf.org Reply-To: soudeh@cs.jhu.edu Mail-Reply-To: soudeh@cs.jhu.edu In-Reply-To: <15aea96667ea9dc1af217a8c1a6a3c7b@cs.jhu.edu> References: <15aea96667ea9dc1af217a8c1a6a3c7b@cs.jhu.edu> Message-ID: X-Sender: soudeh@cs.jhu.edu User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.0.12 Received-SPF: None client-ip=128.220.13.76; helo=web3.cs.jhu.edu; envelope-from= receiver=blaze.cs.jhu.edu Archived-At: Subject: Re: [i2rs] ACM SIGCOMM Symposium on SDN Research (SOSR) 2020 CFP X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 15 Oct 2019 08:28:35 -0000 Just a friendly reminder that SOSR's submission deadline is in almost 1 month. * Abstract registration: Nov 8, 2019 * Submission deadline: Nov 15, 2019 * Submission website: https://sosr20.hotcrp.com * More information: https://conferences.sigcomm.org/sosr/2020/calls.html --- Soudeh Ghorbani Assistant Professor Department of Computer Science Johns Hopkins University soudeh.net On 2019-09-25 19:44, Soudeh Ghorbani wrote: > We are excited to announce that the ACM SIGCOMM Symposium on SDN > Research (SOSR) 2020 will be co-located with the Open Compute Project > (OCP) Global Summit. > > New this year, in addition to traditional research papers, we are > soliciting "Experience and Challenge" papers that provide a > retrospective of the practical impacts of SDN deployments and outline > next steps, challenges, and radical ideas for SDNs. > > * Abstract registration: Nov 8, 2019 > * Submission deadline: Nov 15, 2019 > * More information: > https://conferences.sigcomm.org/sosr/2020/calls.html > > Submit your best papers! > -- > Soudeh Ghorbani > Assistant Professor > Department of Computer Science > Johns Hopkins University > soudeh.net From nobody Tue Oct 15 19:50:36 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietf.org Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B2E0120843; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 19:50:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: i2rs@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.105.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: i2rs@ietf.org Message-ID: <157119422151.28028.8130356953891796855@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 19:50:21 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [i2rs] I-D Action: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-12.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 02:50:22 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Interface to the Routing System WG of the IETF. Title : A YANG Data Model for Layer-2 Network Topologies Authors : Jie Dong Xiugang Wei Qin Wu Mohamed Boucadair Anders Liu Filename : draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-12.txt Pages : 35 Date : 2019-10-15 Abstract: This document defines a YANG data model for Layer 2 network topologies. Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor) Please update these statements within the document with the RFC number to be assigned to this document: o "This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX;" o "RFC XXXX: A YANG Data Model for Layer-2 Network Topologies"; o reference: RFC XXXX Please update the "revision" date of the YANG module. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-12 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-12 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-12 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Tue Oct 15 20:02:31 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1BA5120849; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 20:02:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 R--SJYwo3eGR; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 20:02:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CD84120846; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 20:02:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 855DCE4042BE222602C3; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 04:02:24 +0100 (IST) Received: from lhreml705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.54) by LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 04:02:49 +0100 Received: from lhreml705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.54) by lhreml705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.54) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 04:02:24 +0100 Received: from DGGEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.50) by lhreml705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.54) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 04:02:23 +0100 Received: from DGGEML511-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.72]) by dggeml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.3.17.50]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 11:02:21 +0800 From: Qin Wu To: "i2rs@ietf.org" CC: "i2rs-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-12.txt Thread-Index: AdWDzOlaCqs9VOhyTWWGUwMMGWoPSg== Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:02:20 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.134.31.203] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Subject: Re: [i2rs] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-12.txt X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 16 Oct 2019 03:02:30 -0000 SGksIEFsbDoNCnYtMTIgaXMgcG9zdGVkLCB0byBhZGRyZXNzIGNvbW1lbnRzIHJlY2VpdmVkIGZy b20gV0dMQyBhbmQgc2hlcGhlcmQgcmV2aWV3DQpodHRwczovL3Rvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2h0bWwv ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDItbmV0d29yay10b3BvbG9neS0xMg0KVGhlIG1haW4gY2hh bmdlcyBpbmNsdWRlOg0KMS4gQWRkIGxhZyBzdXBwb3J0DQoyLiBBZGQgbmVnb3RpYXRpb24gbW9k ZQ0KMy4gQWRkIFFpblEgYW5kIFZYTEFOIHN1cHBvcnQgd2hpY2ggaXMgaW5kaWNhdGVkIGJ5IGV4 aXN0aW5nIEV0aGVybmV0IGVuY2Fwc3VsYXRpb24gdHlwZS4NCg0KLVFpbg0KLS0tLS3pgq7ku7bl jp/ku7YtLS0tLQ0K5Y+R5Lu25Lq6OiBpbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgW21haWx0bzpp bnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdHNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIA0K5Y+R6YCB5pe26Ze0OiAyMDE55bm0MTDmnIgxNuaX pSAxMDo1MA0K5pS25Lu25Lq6OiBXZWl4aXVnYW5nIDx3ZWl4aXVnYW5nQGh1YXdlaS5jb20+OyBB bmRlcnMgTGl1IDxhbmRlcnNsaXVAdGVuY2VudC5jb20+OyBRaW4gV3UgPGJpbGwud3VAaHVhd2Vp LmNvbT47IE1vaGFtZWQgQm91Y2FkYWlyIDxtb2hhbWVkLmJvdWNhZGFpckBvcmFuZ2UuY29tPjsg RG9uZ2ppZSAoSmltbXkpIDxqaWUuZG9uZ0BodWF3ZWkuY29tPjsgUWluIFd1IDxiaWxsLnd1QGh1 YXdlaS5jb20+DQrkuLvpopg6IE5ldyBWZXJzaW9uIE5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbiBmb3IgZHJhZnQtaWV0 Zi1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDItbmV0d29yay10b3BvbG9neS0xMi50eHQNCg0KDQpBIG5ldyB2ZXJzaW9u IG9mIEktRCwgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDItbmV0d29yay10b3BvbG9neS0xMi50eHQN CmhhcyBiZWVuIHN1Y2Nlc3NmdWxseSBzdWJtaXR0ZWQgYnkgUWluIFd1IGFuZCBwb3N0ZWQgdG8g dGhlIElFVEYgcmVwb3NpdG9yeS4NCg0KTmFtZToJCWRyYWZ0LWlldGYtaTJycy15YW5nLWwyLW5l dHdvcmstdG9wb2xvZ3kNClJldmlzaW9uOgkxMg0KVGl0bGU6CQlBIFlBTkcgRGF0YSBNb2RlbCBm b3IgTGF5ZXItMiBOZXR3b3JrIFRvcG9sb2dpZXMNCkRvY3VtZW50IGRhdGU6CTIwMTktMTAtMTUN Ckdyb3VwOgkJaTJycw0KUGFnZXM6CQkzNQ0KVVJMOiAgICAgICAgICAgIGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lmll dGYub3JnL2ludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0cy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWkycnMteWFuZy1sMi1uZXR3b3JrLXRv cG9sb2d5LTEyLnR4dA0KU3RhdHVzOiAgICAgICAgIGh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5v cmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtaTJycy15YW5nLWwyLW5ldHdvcmstdG9wb2xvZ3kvDQpIdG1saXpl ZDogICAgICAgaHR0cHM6Ly90b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtaTJycy15YW5n LWwyLW5ldHdvcmstdG9wb2xvZ3ktMTINCkh0bWxpemVkOiAgICAgICBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFj a2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtaTJycy15YW5nLWwyLW5ldHdvcmstdG9w b2xvZ3kNCkRpZmY6ICAgICAgICAgICBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9yZmNkaWZmP3VybDI9 ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1pMnJzLXlhbmctbDItbmV0d29yay10b3BvbG9neS0xMg0KDQpBYnN0cmFjdDoN CiAgIFRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgZGVmaW5lcyBhIFlBTkcgZGF0YSBtb2RlbCBmb3IgTGF5ZXIgMiBu ZXR3b3JrDQogICB0b3BvbG9naWVzLg0KDQpFZGl0b3JpYWwgTm90ZSAoVG8gYmUgcmVtb3ZlZCBi eSBSRkMgRWRpdG9yKQ0KDQogICBQbGVhc2UgdXBkYXRlIHRoZXNlIHN0YXRlbWVudHMgd2l0aGlu IHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCB3aXRoIHRoZSBSRkMNCiAgIG51bWJlciB0byBiZSBhc3NpZ25lZCB0byB0 aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50Og0KDQogICBvICAiVGhpcyB2ZXJzaW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgWUFORyBtb2R1bGUg aXMgcGFydCBvZiBSRkMgWFhYWDsiDQoNCiAgIG8gICJSRkMgWFhYWDogQSBZQU5HIERhdGEgTW9k ZWwgZm9yIExheWVyLTIgTmV0d29yayBUb3BvbG9naWVzIjsNCg0KICAgbyAgcmVmZXJlbmNlOiBS RkMgWFhYWA0KDQogICBQbGVhc2UgdXBkYXRlIHRoZSAicmV2aXNpb24iIGRhdGUgb2YgdGhlIFlB TkcgbW9kdWxlLg0KDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgDQoNCg0KUGxlYXNlIG5vdGUg dGhhdCBpdCBtYXkgdGFrZSBhIGNvdXBsZSBvZiBtaW51dGVzIGZyb20gdGhlIHRpbWUgb2Ygc3Vi bWlzc2lvbiB1bnRpbCB0aGUgaHRtbGl6ZWQgdmVyc2lvbiBhbmQgZGlmZiBhcmUgYXZhaWxhYmxl IGF0IHRvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnLg0KDQpUaGUgSUVURiBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdA0KDQo= From nobody Tue Oct 22 20:46:28 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87EC712006F; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:46:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=aviatus.onmicrosoft.com 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 w7O_yMeSe9_V; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:46:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAM01-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr740049.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.74.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5F2912000F; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:46:22 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=i27aEcvQtZpFeorGlVPuqOJvRaBSIqIIKRIdZAtiLd9I/SUvVGPKqtKfoqfJX8ufHTPbLvfncXozrWvQekv0oZBHdz6AJ+CVHW624aE0TZkd4Q5ucnmwwk9/LEcQo+EA7KSVwXItlizngUh8JuWpeDJYlubBnfGnsI79/RSxmRlTxls2v9Qmnm1VgyxaUbvP7lw0ADuCbpsRuPDU1dC/7LGOGCRg7nFptuhok57UMEpxdut87nviVHTARp7CLy1g9VDk77b4m5wNeIYhIiR+MCgWd6xTYFpdwzIAdppIv8aCxg09A7CkUXCYcwhgIN8lIMNiIaNrTtYeKxTKfVp9Ng== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=a9sYTAzEiZcSzmrx/gT0WDaNcySmuQpbFGDvVe/+m5g=; b=JV0BLpqlFCZV9gUGH7FkAdNBPBe8YKxH9eWKFibeQkxl2ExqE3HupWxiv+LGQCvU7zuqKLFNlUTbE0GyOU4Aa5JXJmPk9u8BvpQ2GDox9jzoMy862d5x2HgOQI1Wkb30CYWY4KZfdJB6Prqu//USJbey3Cb23fLHBmC7G+hT3BFJha6AJY+B0oeIEFowaWA157rmI7rotUZhrSMhuoXHFVqSWhl2unPHumGXABa6+EMWOHshi8vY5dlL2dV3zf0ghghlJ+I0S2rA6lyJxrUkVAOXVIwD0s/70UAfGaInQR8vYCdXQUgd4RB3qm7Y5B+Jy5LGcPlUCLvJxBeukfrZ2A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=aviatnet.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=aviatnet.com; dkim=pass header.d=aviatnet.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aviatus.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-aviatus-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=a9sYTAzEiZcSzmrx/gT0WDaNcySmuQpbFGDvVe/+m5g=; b=Eo3vjiVjhaR/R6pVuz4H2MzKWun5VyakALYb+1opdax3NKNAWSmHCBfD/e+LOnz+QlJI2avCsWJlJrVwk7icHUE2bk22RqwMrO6FHO0gpYE+MkBnS+xtV/2YH4i6k6XdhOxF4BxVNObMcuCcGwifPBskxH458/BsjCKJktqaK9s= Received: from MWHPR2201MB1215.namprd22.prod.outlook.com (10.172.63.138) by MWHPR2201MB1581.namprd22.prod.outlook.com (10.174.167.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2367.20; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 03:46:19 +0000 Received: from MWHPR2201MB1215.namprd22.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c596:21b4:4d:d6c7]) by MWHPR2201MB1215.namprd22.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c596:21b4:4d:d6c7%8]) with mapi id 15.20.2387.019; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 03:46:19 +0000 From: Stephen Cheng To: "i2rs@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Mail regarding draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology: Modelling of L3 links supported by a L2 broadcast network Thread-Index: AdWJVGzAlVXS+uFGSSCAJHKFK7xOXQ== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 03:46:19 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-NZ, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Stephen.Cheng@Aviatnet.com; x-originating-ip: [202.27.34.26] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1f5e08df-ebce-4f47-f5ad-08d7576b90d8 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MWHPR2201MB1581: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882; x-forefront-prvs: 019919A9E4 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(346002)(366004)(39850400004)(396003)(376002)(136003)(189003)(199004)(33656002)(14454004)(64756008)(54896002)(8676002)(81166006)(7736002)(66476007)(478600001)(66556008)(81156014)(102836004)(66446008)(2906002)(76116006)(66946007)(6306002)(55016002)(74316002)(9686003)(8936002)(256004)(790700001)(99286004)(3846002)(6436002)(6506007)(186003)(7696005)(25786009)(66066001)(5660300002)(4744005)(6116002)(26005)(52536014)(71190400001)(86362001)(486006)(476003)(316002)(450100002)(71200400001)(2501003)(110136005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MWHPR2201MB1581; H:MWHPR2201MB1215.namprd22.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: Aviatnet.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: LrV9HRIS/lapv2oKAUGy/yQMAYxzsezHP0lQHZRDX9nwTHHO9uEIa5BMWzPZ1htU0kpXybVJF0xcDHmiDlPd1Dt9KSJDVp4ME4Fr/+jhK9ylEOKh4sKuGhiCa44lFvjCsR508n4Gh4m3qBfJVoiJZ5qjqkZY4Rr4HGt1MDrG7ScRXnNtjZiZXbNEYVi8+TwhzPPNv0aakvK92s352nwKPK5BiYQ9/F8mhUvmJDVVXHzMxsmEvj/cpAIg9yACpEcaG+cvgh0Z1nxiVFd488Nc3T8fWNBHUddri+g1/5vf5yID7zTAyGNjEcOcE99eMlBe77IX/Qm/mJBs6SPbRe2Y030cM3654zXGtudN5X7DlceH9EC5x4M+yU31fSCByfBvZez6qDfa8AnoAMPKn0Kq64n5T0qMpTEiTNRpJr3ZjJzFjp+dGmpUCfeSBV4cFbL5 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MWHPR2201MB1215A10308FBEFFF73E70A74996B0MWHPR2201MB1215_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: aviatnet.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1f5e08df-ebce-4f47-f5ad-08d7576b90d8 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Oct 2019 03:46:19.8689 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 8d7d22b9-3890-4eef-95a6-a226e64151be X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: LjspT7+WXauF4tVaUO7eXjfnyy0yW6dnTawvb6wqIBrZm8MEAIN+C5ldF+RS8yrlR9t2oCKLR/VLPdR9/6QzaNnP7Popa+xugRnyhZUmOqM= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR2201MB1581 Archived-At: Subject: [i2rs] Mail regarding draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology: Modelling of L3 links supported by a L2 broadcast network X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 23 Oct 2019 03:46:26 -0000 --_000_MWHPR2201MB1215A10308FBEFFF73E70A74996B0MWHPR2201MB1215_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Authors of RFC 8346, I have a few questions regarding RFC 8346, and would appreciate your illumi= nation. 1. Is RFC 8346 ietf-l3-topology intended to cover modelling of L3 links = that is supported by a L2 broadcast network (such as an Ethernet network)? 2. If so, would it be correct to model the L3 connection between every p= air of L3 device on the L2 broadcast network as a pair of unidirectional l3= unicast link ? For example if there are 100 devices on 192.168.1/24 networ= k, should there be 9900 unidirectional l3 unicast links? Thanks. Warm regards, Stephen Cheng --_000_MWHPR2201MB1215A10308FBEFFF73E70A74996B0MWHPR2201MB1215_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Authors of RFC 8346,

 

I have a few questions regarding RFC 8346, and would= appreciate your illumination.

  1. Is RFC 8346 ietf-l3-topology intended to cover modelling of L3 links = that is supported by a L2 broadcast network (such as an Ethernet network)?<= o:p>
  2. If so, would it be correct to model the L3 connection = between every pair of L3 device on the L2 broadcast network as a pair of un= idirectional l3 unicast link ? For example if there are 100 devices on 192.168.1/24 network, should there be 9900 unidirection= al l3 unicast links?

Thanks.

 

Warm regards,

Stephen Cheng

 

--_000_MWHPR2201MB1215A10308FBEFFF73E70A74996B0MWHPR2201MB1215_-- From nobody Tue Oct 22 20:53:27 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B921012006F; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:53:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.997 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 WJ53yIDA59ll; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot1-x32a.google.com (mail-ot1-x32a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32a]) (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 C8CD912000F; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id 89so16159867oth.13; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:53:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=clkYh5UH6aS1z+rP+FrA5mP9qbE4KKhfTdztKVqaZL4=; b=ce3Ulg4jDdVBHGobi0hCkKTDbZJCxJgABeR4TDGYaxiksTaeBTK2vEsD7HA/EyADlh KNw/Ozu89H7xP52hiOvZIf23M0ASYO7uYYXOZQMFXiABiRua6x9t9ZXlb0EG/JcGjdEi pzFHGqFZPkTdDc9d+HfymlrP1sQ6NNAA91zQA7S6WiPy0WvEJvN1SGZEaB9hkc+xPV7e gAEzT0D/91LJofgY/FSOByK1EtoDejnK3cMqEcaZG4gVGsTvN6MUaszKnqAHaJ7wzCcK sHLEJ5c9kkxEXg6ww+6is1NBkfPVW42fpM8cO+Pk/UddbU0A3H9UsCsXafR+gf2sBOlb yySg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=clkYh5UH6aS1z+rP+FrA5mP9qbE4KKhfTdztKVqaZL4=; b=mtMGKFHN9cRubfebt2J6vF8SNYCq+Ar+7HTwWV2mX4jjaNPtg/MQO1VMkWziapdNG7 SYgvJwsWv3WKuvRqW/IXNvP1SFExi5b/xPHl+BZXABceKSgsCEM3Ps7ZHR30Cc93Ax+N 87PSD0lW3AekGzSt+yuCZLYVD2F5WHL8B74XajxmnsB4wIjdiXOAgbq+AKHzm636nZ6/ q5K0e8mAQS0GN+khDRypNNHZlBaD9thJoNmG8Ch7wew7sqZHO6ixFmSpG40zmPPin3sL dB7FbqvHJ1MgmZ34R7PEjdCruNcr/c3R7lHl5w6cu512PBqlLvXw42Jl1P9/EvCZlPtk Nq7g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUzaWqVUmuS/MqNFrzPSS1vLs1mSf6XYGqiQ0n/oCfGKgjPOVY7 NjXlr9xJAzGOcxkQmc3NFdLPdwleMtXfItKIy4Y= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxLPvpDTIQktXGrJy3QqdZ+twJ5/MOXWhMCE88ZP1Semld9xj3NQjXiAyCqABhgA6W0jC4mE1dnXN6uivEf8CA= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:39a1:: with SMTP id y30mr5581953otb.144.1571802802831; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:53:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Alia Atlas Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 23:53:11 -0400 Message-ID: To: Stephen Cheng Cc: "i2rs@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b8858405958bdbee" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [i2rs] Mail regarding draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology: Modelling of L3 links supported by a L2 broadcast network X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 23 Oct 2019 03:53:26 -0000 --000000000000b8858405958bdbee Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Stephen, An L2 broadcast network is usually modeled with a pseudo-node and then separate links between that pseudonode and each L3 device. Please take a look at Section B.1.2 where one of the example ospf-node-attributes is a pseudonode. Regards, Alia On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 11:46 PM Stephen Cheng wrote: > Authors of RFC 8346, > > > > I have a few questions regarding RFC 8346, and would appreciate your > illumination. > > 1. Is RFC 8346 ietf-l3-topology intended to cover modelling of L3 > links that is supported by a L2 broadcast network (such as an Ethernet > network)? > 2. If so, would it be correct to model the L3 connection between every > pair of L3 device on the L2 broadcast network as a pair of unidirectional > l3 unicast link ? For example if there are 100 devices on 192.168.1/24 > network, should there be 9900 unidirectional l3 unicast links? > > Thanks. > > > > Warm regards, > > Stephen Cheng > > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > i2rs@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > --000000000000b8858405958bdbee Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Stephen,

An L2 broadcast network is = usually modeled with a pseudo-node and then separate links between that pse= udonode and
each L3 device.=C2=A0 Please take a look at Section B= .1.2 where one of the example ospf-node-attributes is a pseudonode.

Regards,
Alia

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 11:4= 6 PM Stephen Cheng <Stephe= n.Cheng@aviatnet.com> wrote:

Authors of RFC 8346,

=C2=A0

I have a few questions regarding RFC 8346, and would= appreciate your illumination.

  1. Is RFC 8346 ietf-l3-topology intended to cove= r modelling of L3 links that is supported by a L2 broadcast network (such a= s an Ethernet network)?
  2. If = so, would it be correct to model the L3 connection between every pair of L3= device on the L2 broadcast network as a pair of unidirectional l3 unicast = link ? For example if there are 100 devices on 192.168.1/24 network, should there be 9900 unidirection= al l3 unicast links?

Thanks.

=C2=A0

Warm regards,

Stephen Cheng

=C2=A0

_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
i2rs@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
--000000000000b8858405958bdbee--