Subject: [Lime] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lime-yang-oam-model-09.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 18:20:44 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Layer Independent OAM Management in the Multi-Layer Environment of the IETF.

        Title           : Generic YANG Data Model for Connection Oriented Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols
        Authors         : Deepak Kumar
                          Qin Wu
                          Michael Wang
	Filename        : draft-ietf-lime-yang-oam-model-09.txt
	Pages           : 52
	Date            : 2017-03-06

Abstract:
   This document presents a base YANG Data model for connection oriented
   OAM protocols.  It provides a technology-independent abstraction of
   key OAM constructs for such protocols.  The model presented here can
   be extended to include technology specific details.  This guarantees
   uniformity in the management of OAM protocols and provides support
   for nested OAM workflows (i.e., performing OAM functions at different
   levels through a unified interface)

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lime-yang-oam-model/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lime-yang-oam-model-09

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lime-yang-oam-model-09

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: wangzitao <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 02:23:20 +0000

Dear WG,

According to the WGLC discussions, we update the Connection Oriented OAM YANG document.
Thanks AdrIan Farrel, Greg Mirsky and others’ review and comments. 
In this version, we fix some nits, address the issues raised in email discussion, 
and add a MIP list in CO model. More details please see the draft.

Best Regards!
-Michael

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Lime [mailto:[email-masked]] 代表 [email-masked]
发送时间: 2017年3月7日 10:21
收件人: [email-masked]
抄送: [email-masked]
主题: [Lime] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lime-yang-oam-model-09.txt

Abstract:

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.

_______________________________________________
Lime mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime

---

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 21:31:49 -0800

Hi Michael, Authors,
thank you for updating this and other LIME drafts (CL OAM model and CL OAM
methods). As I was not presented with opportunity to discuss any of the
changes during your update of the drafts, I cannot confirm that my comments
have been properly addressed. I'll review new versions and will share my
comments.

Regards,
Greg

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:23 PM, wangzitao <[email-masked]> wrote:

>         Title           : Generic YANG Data Model for Connection Oriented
> Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols
>         Authors         : Deepak Kumar
>                           Qin Wu
>                           Michael Wang
> 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.
>

---

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:52:00 -0500

Dear Authors, WG Chairs, et. al,
please consider my comments to the latest version of the CO OAM YANG model:

   - "remote RDI" is repetitive as RDI stands for Remote Defect Indication.
   - I encourage to clearly separate Continuity Check from Connectivity
   Verification. As I read from the draft, it does not address proactive OAM
   but only on-demand OAM (I'll comment on my view how these are different
   below). Thus I'll point that on-demand OAM cannot serve as Continuity
   Verification OAM since Mis-connection Defect cannot be determined based on
   on-demand OAM.
   - I propose the following definitions for proactive and on-demand OAM:
      - proactive OAM method requires persistent configuration
      - on-demand OAM method requires only transient configuration
   - document refers to globally unique Source MEP ID but has no example,
   nor explanation how one is constructed.
   - Maintenance Domain contains two md-levels - one of its own and one in
   MIP.
   - not clear why model explicitly refers to mpls-ttl out of all MPLS(-TP)
   - continuity-check RPC does not use md-level
   - traceroute RPC does not use md-level

Regards,
Greg