Hi Mahesh, all,

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-acl-extensions/07/ has now 
the sets defined as reusable groupings + augment the ACL models. The structure 
is basically a revert back to what we used to have in -00.

Cheers,
Med

De : netmod <[email protected]> De la part de Mahesh Jethanandani
Envoyé : mardi 30 avril 2024 02:58
À : Lou Berger <[email protected]>
Cc : NETMOD Working Group <[email protected]>; NETMOD WG Chairs 
<[email protected]>
Objet : Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-extensions-06



Hi Lou,

I have reviewed the document and believe it is ready for publication barring 
one comment and one clarification from Joe. I refer to this thread:

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/QrixYe6E4R9TFZ0O0S7eBaj4RyY/

In particular, this comment from that thread. What I wanted to add for 
clarification, is that I agree with Joe on defining a grouping for defined-sets 
that can then be used by other models. However, when it comes to the ACL 
extension model itself, I believe that defined-sets should be defined as an 
augmentation of the ACL model, and should not be defined as a standalone 
container sitting at the root of the config tree. See sample YANG code below.

I actually agree with your above statement in the Introduction that you had, 
about the module being solely an enhancement of the ACL YANG model, and was 
surprised to see it taken out. The point I was making was that just like what 
you have done with augmenting "/acl:acls/acl:acl/acl:aces/acl:ace/acl:matches” 
to add ‘choice payload’, ‘choice alias’ etc, you could have augmented 
“/acl:acls” to add ‘defined-sets’ and ‘aliases’.
Right now, as is, the ietf-acl-enh module sits on the root of the config tree, 
with no relation to the ACL model, other than references to it from within the 
ACL model. If the definitions in ietf-acl-enh are to be consumed by the ACL 
model only, why not augment the ACL model (as shown below) to add them in the 
ACL tree?

[Med] This is fair. Now that I managed to refresh the context in my mind I 
confirm that we have done that in a previous version of the spec, but the 
feedback we received from the WG was to move those upper in the hierarchy 
(because there might be other cases). See for example 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-115-netmod-202211080930/<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/QrixYe6E4R9TFZ0O0S7eBaj4RyY/%3Ca%20href=>"
 
rel="nofollow">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-115-netmod-202211080930/:

==
Joe Clarke: It would be nice in a standalone container (i.e. groupings that 
could be imported). I see some other use cases for these defined groupings 
besides just ACLs.
==

I know that routing policy uses defined-sets, but I believe they have already 
defined their own. Which other models do you foresee using these groupings 
(which I am now correcting to as ask, “… using this standalone container”?).




If that is the case I see no reason why those containers should not be 
augmentations into the same model, as in

augment “/acl:acls” {
  container defined-sets {
  ….
  }

  container aliases {
     …
  }
}



On Apr 29, 2024, at 2:41 PM, Lou Berger 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

All,

This starts working group last call on
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-acl-extensions/

The working group last call ends on May 13th.
Please send your comments to the working group mailing list.

Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document
and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome!
This is useful and important, even from authors.

Thank you,
Lou (Co-Chair & doc Shepherd)


_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod


Mahesh Jethanandani
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>





____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to