Hi Tom, At least the command "netstat -n" in Windows 10 seems to display the zone for (link-local) IPv6 addresses. At least I have seen this on my own PC. So I guess we need a strong reason not to allow a zone in the YANG module (obviously it is optional). My suggestion is that we keep the current model as is - unless somebody strongly disagrees with allowing a zone. Michael > -----Original Message----- > From: tom petch <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 5:38 PM > To: Scharf, Michael <Michael.Scharf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; t petch > <ietfa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; last-call@xxxxxxxx > Cc: draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp@xxxxxxxx; tcpm@xxxxxxxx; tcpm-chairs@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [Last-Call] [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-06.txt> (A > YANG Model for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Configuration) to > Proposed Standard > > On 17/06/2022 10:01, Scharf, Michael wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > Many thanks for again reading this draft. These are all good catches. > > > > We have addressed all points noted below in the new version -07, except > for one comment: > > > > We have kept in -07 the IP address modeling that includes the zone. My > own understand so far is that the models with the zone are the default in > many YANG models. As a result, we probably need a reason not to allow a > zone in draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp. Allowing it seems a more conservative > approach, and therefore we have not changed this in -07. Yet, further > feedback on the use of the zone would really be welcome. > > Well yes. There was an interesting discussion on the LSR and later > NETMOD list recently where authors, who had not understood that > including the zone was what you got, sought to change RFC6991-bis to be > the other way round on the grounds that that was what everyone expected > and wanted. I think that that idea has died down but suspect that many > wished that they had specified '-no-zone' in their modules. > > I raised to ensure that you were aware of what you are doing since some > others were not:-( > > zones are troublesome in other regards as crops up on the 6man list in > that there is no agreed way to put them in a URI which Brian Carpenter > has been pursuing and sees a way forward now that IE 10 is out of > support (yes, it is all rather weird - not one of IPv6's finest hours). > > Tom Petch > > > Version -07 tries to address also other IETF last call reviews and thus > includes several changes. Please have a look at the new version > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-07) or the > diff (https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-07) and let > us know if more is needed. > > > > Best regards > > > > Michael > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: t petch <ietfa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 11:00 AM > >> To: last-call@xxxxxxxx > >> Cc: draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp@xxxxxxxx; tcpm@xxxxxxxx; tcpm- > chairs@xxxxxxxx > >> Subject: Re: [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-06.txt> (A YANG > >> Model for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Configuration) to Proposed > >> Standard > >> > >> On 16/02/2022 22:42, The IESG wrote: > >>> > >>> The IESG has received a request from the TCP Maintenance and Minor > >> Extensions > >>> WG (tcpm) to consider the following document: - 'A YANG Model for > >>> Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Configuration' > >> > >> Some stray thoughts. > >> > >> All the IP address objects use the format that includes the zone; is > >> this intended? > >> > >> You mention the i2nsf-capability-data-model as an example of modelling > >> TCP. i2nsf-nsf-facing could be another. > >> > >> The TLP in the YANG module is out of date (like the Copyright date). > >> > >> The example uses port 80 which is traditionally insecure. A secure port > >> might set a better example. > >> > >> Tom Petch > >> > >>> <draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-06.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 2022-03-02. 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 specifies a minimal YANG model for TCP on devices > that > >>> are configured by network management protocols. The YANG model > >>> defines a container for all TCP connections and groupings of > >>> authentication parameters that can be imported and used in TCP > >>> implementations or by other models that need to configure TCP > >>> parameters. The model also includes basic TCP statistics. The model > >>> is compliant with Network Management Datastore Architecture > (NMDA) > >>> (RFC 8342). > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> The file can be obtained via > >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp/ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> tcpm mailing list > >>> tcpm@xxxxxxxx > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm > >>> . > >>> > > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
