Subject: [Rtg-yang-coord] rtg-cfg hierachy (added rtg-wg)

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 23:02:45 +0000

Hi Thomas, 

It is my understanding that the RIBs were moved out of the
routing-instance in response to your comment that a RIB would need to be
attached to multiple routing instances. I don¹t agree with this model. I
believe that a routing instance implies a VRF, virtual router or something
in between and that a RIB should be associated with one and only one
routing instance. Additionally, I feel that RIBs are basically passive
entities with respect to import/export of routes between RIBs in the same
or other routing-instances. Rather, all import/export is under the control
of a routing-protocol. For example, this would be handled by a BGP
routing-protocol instance for L3VPNs.

I¹d like to get the opinions of others on this fundamental aspect of the
rtg-cfg model. 

Thanks,
Acee

---

From: Ladislav Lhotka <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 11:10:29 +0100

Hi,

> attached to multiple routing instances. I don¹t agree with this

Acee refers to this comment that Thomas made in his review of
draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-02 on 2012-03-23:

"Allowing multiple "routers" is a good starting point for using these
specs in the context of RFC4364 (MPLS/BGP IP VPNs). However, if I
understand correctly Yang syntax, the way the filters are defined would
not work in the context of RFC4364, where a BGP routing instance in the
master "router" exports selected routes in each of the routing table of
each VPN (VRF).  The VRF also export routes to the master instance."

And indeed, in rev. -03 the list of RIBs (then called "routing-table")
was the moved out of the routing instance (then called "router") and
became global.

Lada

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C

---

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 18:28:53 +0000

Hi Lada, Thomas, 

>was the moved out of the routing instance (then called "router") and

Then do you agree to move the RIBs back into the routing-instance? Both
the BGP YANG drafts model L3VPN definitions under the corresponding
address family in BGP.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shaikh-idr-bgp-model-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-zhdankin-idr-bgp-cfg-00.txt

Thanks,
Acee