Subject: [netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-02

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 09:48:16 -0400

Authors, Contributors, WG,

As part of the preparation for WG Last Call:

Are you aware of any IPR that applies to drafts identified above?

Please state either:

"No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft"
or
"Yes, I'm aware of IPR that applies to this draft"

If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
(see RFCs 3669, 5378 and 8179 for more details)?

If yes to the above, please state either:

"Yes, the IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules"
or
"No, the IPR has not been disclosed"

If you answer no, please provide any additional details you think
appropriate.

If you are listed as a document author or contributor please answer the
above by responding to this email regardless of whether or not you are
aware of any relevant IPR. This document will not advance to the next
stage until a response has been received from each author and listed
contributor. NOTE: THIS APPLIES TO ALL OF YOU LISTED IN THIS MESSAGE'S
TO LINES.

If you are on the WG email list or attend WG meetings but are not listed
as an author or contributor, we remind you of your obligations under
the IETF IPR rules which encourages you to notify the IETF if you are
aware of IPR of others on an IETF contribution, or to refrain from
participating in any contribution or discussion related to your
undisclosed IPR. For more information, please see the RFCs listed above
and
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/IntellectualProperty.

Thank you,
NetMod WG Chairs

PS Please include all listed in the headers of this message in your
response.

---

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:55:38 +0000

As a co-author, 

No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft.

Thanks,
Acee

---

From: Ladislav Lhotka <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 16:18:20 +0200

Lada

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67

---

From: Robert Wilton <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 16:58:30 +0100

I support adoption of this draft.

I have reviewed draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-02, and ask that the 
following comments be considered after the document has been adopted:

1. Does the draft still require a normative reference to 6020? Given 
that the modules are all YANG revision 1.1 perhaps this isn't required 
any more?

2. In appendix D:
i) it would be better if the YANG library example was updated to match 
the model in YANG library bis (e.g. use a modules path rather than 
modules-state).
ii) I think that it should state that this is an example of the data 
that may be received by reading from the operational state datastore.
iii) In the example, the "interface-state" tree output should be merged 
in with "interfaces" so illustrate the combined NMDA view.

3. ipv6 prefix list.
When I had first looked at combining the existing RFC YANG modules to 
NMDA, I came up with a slightly different way of modelling IPv6 
prefixes, splitting "no-advertise-prefix-list" separately from the 
"advertised prefixes".

E.g. if your draft the tree output is:

       +--rw prefix-list
          +--rw prefix* [prefix-spec]
             +--rw prefix-spec           inet:ipv6-prefix
             +--rw (control-adv-prefixes)?
                +--:(no-advertise)
                |  +--rw no-advertise?         empty
                +--:(advertise)
                   +--rw valid-lifetime?       uint32
                   +--rw on-link-flag?         boolean
                   +--rw preferred-lifetime?   uint32
                   +--rw autonomous-flag?      boolean

Perhaps you could consider this structure instead (I can send you the 
actual YANG if it helps):

        +--rw no-advertise-prefix-list
        |  +--rw prefix* [prefix-spec]
        |     +--rw prefix-spec     inet:ipv6-prefix
        |     +--rw (control-adv-prefixes)?
        |        +--:(no-advertise)
        |           +--rw no-advertise?   empty
        +--rw prefix-list
           +--rw prefix* [prefix-spec]
              +--rw prefix-spec           inet:ipv6-prefix
              +--ro valid-lifetime?       uint32
              +--ro on-link-flag?         boolean
              +--ro preferred-lifetime?   uint32
              +--ro autonomous-flag?      boolean

Thanks,
Rob

On 18/09/2017 14:55, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> .
>

---

From: Yingzhen Qu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:53:53 +0000

Thanks,
Yingzhen

-----Original Message-----
From: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 6:56 AM
To: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>; Ladislav Lhotka <[email-masked]>; Yingzhen Qu <[email-masked]>
Cc: NetMod WG <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Regarding IPR on draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-02

As a co-author, 

Thanks,
Acee 

On 9/18/17, 9:48 AM, "Lou Berger" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>If you are on the WG email list or attend WG meetings but are not 
>listed as an author or contributor, we remind you of your obligations 
>under the IETF IPR rules which encourages you to notify the IETF if you 
>are aware of IPR of others on an IETF contribution, or to refrain from