Dear Luis and Victor,
Here is the very first review of this newly approved WG document, a few
minutes ago :-)
- I believe that the draft positioning in the introduction could be
improved.
For example, what I don't see in the introduction is what you wrote at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/121/materials/slides-121-opsawg-a-yang-data-model-for-network-diagnosis-by-scheduling-sequences-of-oam-tests-00
:
This work aims to reuse existing work like [RFC8531], [RFC8532]
and, [RFC8533], which defined YANG models for OAM technologies.
Btw, I assume that there are RFC853[1-3] implementations out there, right?
Also, what I don't quite easily understand when reading the introduction is:
what is missing from those 3 RFCs?
what does this draft add compared to those 3 RFCs?
The basic idea is that "This document covers how to use OAM for
network-wide use cases.", as you wrote, while the 3 RFCs are at
individual device level?
Or is it that it adds the scheduling of top of those RFCs?
And then I see (later on) that you rely on ietf-netmod-schedule-yang,
but you don't explain how, or which parts you rely on.
I know that the 3 above RFCs and ietf-netmod-schedule-yang are in the
normative but you might simply a bit the reader lives for the draft
positioning in the introduction.
Btw, 21 RFCs as normative references, are you sure that we actually need
all of them as normative?
Following up on the numerous reference (both normative and informative),
it's difficult to follow when you don't mention the RFC title. For example:
This document assumes that the reader is familiar with the contents
of [RFC7950], [RFC8345], [RFC8346] and [RFC8795].
- Coming back to your presentation positioning:
This work aims to reuse existing work like [RFC8531], [RFC8532]
and, [RFC8533], which defined YANG models for OAM technologies.
Are you actually reusing the work in those 3 RFCs? I am now confused
when I see, in the YANG module
// Import OAM models from RFCs RFC8531, RFC8532 and RFC8533
... but no related YANG import statement
- section 2.2
It's the first time I hear about the "birth certificate process" in
networking. So I guess I learned something.
- I don't understand this statement:
(Note: alignment with [I-D.ietf-netmod-schedule-yang] will continue
with the progress of that document)
- The YANG validation fails. See the tracker.
Editorial:
- there is a formatting issue with the + in this section
[RFC8531], [RFC8532], [RFC8533] and [RFC8913] defined YANG models for
OAM technologies: + [RFC8531] defines a YANG data model for
connection-oriented OAM protocols. The main aim of this document is
to define a generic YANG data model that can be used to configure,
control and monitor connection-oriented OAM protocols such as MPLS-TP
OAM, PBB-TE OAM, and G.7713.1 OAM. + [RFC8532] provides a generic
YANG data model that can be used to configure, control and monitor
connectionless OAM protocols such as BFD (Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection), LBM (Loopback Messaging) and VCCV (Virtual Circuit
Connectivity Verification). + [RFC8533] provides a YANG data model
that can be used to retrieve information related to OAM protocols
such as Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), Loopback Messaging
(LBM) and Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV). -
[RFC8913] specifies a YANG data model for client and server
implementations of the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP).
Regards, Benoit
On 1/29/2025 12:32 PM, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-opsawg-scheduling-oam-tests-00.txt is now available.
It is a work item of the Operations and Management Area Working Group (OPSAWG)
WG of the IETF.
Title: A YANG Data Model for Network Diagnosis using Scheduled Sequences
of OAM Tests
Authors: Luis M. Contreras
Victor Lopez
Name: draft-ietf-opsawg-scheduling-oam-tests-00.txt
Pages: 25
Dates: 2025-01-29
Abstract:
This document defines a YANG data model for network diagnosis on-
demand relying upon Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)
tests. This document defines both 'oam-unitary-test' and 'oam-test-
sequence' YANG modules to manage the lifecycle of network diagnosis
procedures.
The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-scheduling-oam-tests/
There is also an HTML version available at:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-opsawg-scheduling-oam-tests-00.html
Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list --opsawg@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email toopsawg-le...@ietf.org
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
