Thanks Tom. As you mentioned, the authors shared their perspective on this at WGLC. We believe it is proper for RFC8349 to allow augmentation with a proper leaf that identifies the route depending on RIB address-family - MPLS RIB routes are identified with a local label. We submitted an errata against RFC8349 at https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6251 Regards, Tarek (for the authors) On 8/6/20, 4:31 AM, "tom petch" <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: This I-D breaks a MUST in RFC8349 Routing Management) and, as such, will not interoperate with devices that implement RFC8349 correctly. 1 RFC8349 provides a YANG action to return the active route for a destination address but omits the destination address, saying that modules using this must augment the input with a leaf destination-address. This I-D augments the input with a leaf local-label so implementations of RFC8349 that 'know' there will be a leaf destination-address will fail to interoperate with this I-D. The authors said, at WGLC, that RFC8349 is wrong, that MPLS has label not address and so the I-D must provide an augment with a label and RFC8349 should change. I disagree; I think that this is reading too many semantics into an identifier. Tom Petch On 05/08/2020 18:04, The IESG wrote: > > The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG > (mpls) to consider the following document: - 'A YANG Data Model for MPLS Base' > <draft-ietf-mpls-base-yang-14.txt> as Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final > comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2020-08-19. Exceptionally, comments may > be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning > of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > This document contains a specification of the MPLS base YANG model. > The MPLS base YANG model serves as a base framework for configuring > and managing an MPLS switching subsystem on an MPLS-enabled router. > It is expected that other MPLS YANG models (e.g. MPLS Label Switched > Path (LSP) Static, LDP or RSVP-TE YANG models) will augment the MPLS > base YANG model. > > > > > The file can be obtained via > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-base-yang/ > > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce > . > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
