Hi Med, see below... On 29-Sep-20 18:40, mohamed.boucadair@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hi Brian, > > Please see inline. > > Cheers, > Med > >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx] >> Envoyé : mardi 29 septembre 2020 00:25 >> À : last-call@xxxxxxxx >> Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-model-automation-framework.all@xxxxxxxx; >> opsawg@xxxxxxxx >> Objet : Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-model-automation- >> framework-06.txt> (A Framework for Automating Service and Network >> Management with YANG) to Informational RFC >> >> Hi, >> >> I have a question for clarification, and then a comment. >> >> First, consider these extracts: >> >>> 5.1. L2VPN/L3VPN Service Delivery >>> >>> In reference to Figure 5, the following steps are performed to >>> deliver the L3VPN service within the network management >> automation >>> architecture defined in this document: >>> >>> 1. The Customer requests to create two sites (as per service >>> creation operation in Section 4.2.1)... >> ... >>> 5.2. VN Lifecycle Management >>> >>> In reference to Figure 7, the following steps are performed to >>> deliver the VN service within the network management automation >>> architecture defined in this document: >>> >>> 1. Customer requests (service exposure operation in Section >> 4.1.1) >>> to create 'VN' based on Access point... >> ... >>> 3. The Customer exchanges connectivity-matrix on abstract node >> and >>> explicit path using TE topology model with the >> orchestrator... >> >> In those examples, how does the customer "request" or "exchange" >> data? I assume this is intended to happen by software, rather than >> by telefax. > > [Med] We hope this can be by software if we want to benefit from the automation in the full cycle but the approach still apply independently how a service request is captured. > > We don't zoom that much on that interface because the document is more on the provider's side. > >> So what protocol is involved, and which entity on the >> customer side is doing it? > > [Med] The component at the client side are generally represented as service ordering (see RFC 4176). That component may interact with the Order Handling at the provider side using a variety of means such as https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc8921.txt (Section 5) or by offering a management interface to the customer, etc. Well, I'd rather see a standardised and generic solution to that problem, as noted in my reply to Adrian. But indeed, that is the requirement. > Please let us know if you think that we need to add some text on this part. I think it needs just a few words in section 3 or 4, even just to say that the mechanism is out of scope for this document. > >> >>> 5.3. Event-based Telemetry in the Device Self Management >>> >>> In reference to Figure 8, the following steps are performed to >>> monitor state changes of managed objects or resources in a >> network >>> device and provide device self-management within the network >>> management automation architecture defined in this document: >>> >>> 1. To control which state a network device should be in or is >>> allowed to be in at any given time, a set of conditions and >>> actions are defined and correlated with network events >> (e.g., >>> allow the NETCONF server to send updates... >> >> Second, this is the first mention of NETCONF in the document, and >> the only other mention is in the Security Considerations. I suggest >> that there should be a short description of the role of NETCONF (and >> RESTCONF) earlier in the document, either in section 3 or more >> likely in section 4 (Functional Blocks and Interactions). > > [Med] Point taken. We will also clarify that in some cases the use of YANG does not require NETCONF/RESTCONF. Thanks. (For example, draft-ietf-anima-grasp-distribution can serve for distributing YANG.) Brian > >> >> Regards >> Brian Carpenter > > > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > 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. > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
