Regarding RSTP/MSTP YANG …
- I believe would require a new 802.1 PAR and CSD.
- This was beyond the scope of the 802.1Qcp project (which introduced the ieee802-dot1q-bridge YANG module).
Regards,
Marc.
From: Rouyer, Jessy (Nokia - US/Dallas) <jessy.rouyer@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 3:48 PM
To: Mick Seaman <mickseaman@xxxxxxxxx>; Paul Congdon <paul.congdon@xxxxxxxxxx>; Scott Mansfield <scott.mansfield@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Steindl, Guenter <guenter.steindl@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Dorr, Josef <josef.dorr@xxxxxxxxxxx>; ludwig.winkel@xxxxxxxxx; Holness, Marc <mholness@xxxxxxxxx>; Janos Farkas <Janos.Farkas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Stephan Kehrer <stephan.kehrer.committees@xxxxxxxxx>; Glenn
Parsons <glenn.parsons@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; stds-802-yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; STDS-802-3-YANG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [**EXTERNAL**] RE: YANG issues related to IEC/IEEE 608002 work
Hi Scott,
Regarding LLDP YANG as an equivalent to LLDP-EXT-DOT3-MIB, I agree with Mick and Paul: the transition from IEEE Std 802.1AB-2005 over time to IEEE Std 802.3 calls in my view for 802.3 to determine the best course of action.
Regarding RSTP/MSTP YANG, the work would require a new 802.1 PAR and CSD in my view. Of course this would require volunteer(s) to step up to facilitate PAR/CSD generation and, if approved, draft development. I would expect such work to
be of interest outside 802.1, for example in BBF.
Hi Scott,
On the 802.3 LLDP use, agree with Paul.
On missing RSTP/MSTP parameters, I believe that this would be best covered by a new PAR. It is probably specialized enough to make attaching it to another project a drag on both it, and the specialized work of the other project. That makes the question
as to whether it could be argued to be 'editorial corrections and omissions in the description of existing functionality' moot (also the 'errors and omissions' text in the Qcw PAR is more narrowly worded). It should not be a large project, the only difficulty
is reviewer bandwidth - making sure we don't accidentally change the existing functionality.
Mick
On 8/4/2021 11:47 AM, Paul Congdon wrote:
My opinions on where and what work needs to be done are below...
Question to leaders: Who does this work? Is it a 802.1 maintenance item, something for P802.1Qcz, something for 802.3, or a new PAR in either 802.1 or 802.3?
Something for 802.3. Certainly not an 802.1 maintenance item. The resulting new YANG module would need to be part of 802.3 just like the extension MIB.
Question to leaders: If there is indeed work that needs to be completed, is this a maintenance item or would a new PAR be needed.
Was this supposed to be in the scope of a previous YANG project? Would we consider this a bug or an enhancement request? If the amount of work is significant, then it probably warrants a new project. There is no current 802.1 maintenance
request related to this missing functionality.
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-YANG list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-YANG&A=1 [listserv.ieee.org]
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-YANG list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-YANG&A=1 [listserv.ieee.org]
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-YANG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-YANG&A=1
|