Subject: Re: [Teas] [CCAMP] AD review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:56:55 -0000

Thanks Young,

Just the last point to be covered...

> Did you consider including a short manageability section?
> 
> YOUNG>> No, as you see the content. Do you have any suggestion in mind?
> 
> Are there any existing management tools that are impacted by the new
> sub-TLVs?
> 
> YOUNG>> I don't think so.
> 
> What might a user expect to configure related to these sub-TLVs?
> 
> What might a user expect to be able to read from a device?
> 
> YOUNG>> These questions sound like either a mib or yang question. I think the
> TLVs defined in this document can be configured/read by EMS or NMS or other
> system.
> Shall a companion document (mib or yang, which by the way I am working on
> WSON Yang model on these TLVs included) if you will address these questions?

So perhaps something like...

x. Manageability Considerations

   No existing management tools handle the additional TE parameters as
   defined in this document and distributed in OSPF-TE.  The existing 
   MIB module contained in [RFC6825] allows the TE information 
   distributed by OSPF-TE to be read from a network node: this MIB 
   module could be augmented (possibly by a sparse augmentation) to
   report this new information.

   The current environment in the IETF favors NETCONF [RFC6241] and YANG
   [RFC6020] over SNMP and MIB modules.  Work is in progress in the TEAS
   working group to develop a YANG module to represent the generic TE 
   information that may be present in a Traffic Engineering Database 
   (TED).  This model may be extended to handle the additional 
   information described in this document to allow that information to 
   be read from network devices or exchanged between consumers of the
   TED.  Furthermore, links state export using BGP (BGP-LS) [draft-ietf-
   idr-ls-distribution] enables the export of TE information from a 
   network using BGP.  Work could realistically be done to extend BGP-LS
   to also carry the information defined in this document.

   It is not envisaged that the extensions defined in this document will
   place substantial additional requirements on Operations, Management,
   and Administration (OAM) mechanisms currently used to diagnose and 
   debug OSPF systems.  However, tools that examine the contents of
   opaque LSAs will need to be enhanced to handle these new sub-TLVs.

Edit this to read the way you want it to, and post a revision.

Thanks,
Adrian

---

From: Leeyoung <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 20:04:19 +0000

Thanks, Adrian for the suggested text. A new revision has been published. 

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-09.txt

Best Regards,
Young

-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 6:57 AM
To: Leeyoung; [email-masked]
Cc: 'Alvaro Retana'; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [CCAMP] AD review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te

Thanks Young,

Thanks,
Adrian