ietf-ccamp-wg / ietf-network-inventory

3 stars 5 forks source link

Applicable attributes in RFC8348 #17

Closed italobusi closed 1 year ago

italobusi commented 2 years ago

Evaluate whether all the attributes defined in RFC8348 needs to be reported in the Inventory model

See: https://github.com/italobusi/ietf-network-inventory/issues/2#issuecomment-903086514

italobusi commented 2 years ago

Network Inventory weekly call (October 13, 2021)

Jeff: the operational state is needed, not the other states

To be further discussed after IETF 112

italobusi commented 2 years ago

2022-05-18 Network Inventory weekly call

italobusi commented 2 years ago

Contribution from @YuChaode : Attributes.xlsx

italobusi commented 2 years ago

2022-05-25 Network Inventory weekly call

[x] @YuChaode : start reviewing the common attributes defined in RFC 8348 and see which ones are applicable to our model

Reviewed table provided by Chaode: https://github.com/italobusi/ietf-network-inventory/files/8772764/Attributes.xlsx

Agreements:

The review of the table will continue offline and at the next meeting.

italobusi commented 2 years ago

2022-06-01 Network Inventory weekly call

Continued reviewing table provided by Chaode: https://github.com/italobusi/ietf-network-inventory/files/8772764/Attributes.xlsx

italobusi commented 2 years ago

2022-06-08 Network Inventory weekly call

YANG model update presented by Yuchaode. Extensions have been removed as agreed in last call. Rack container outside the rack list. Location information for the rack: equipment-room, row-number and column-number. Additional attributes added for the rack: height, width, depth and max-voltage.

Review of the attributes excel table from Yuchaode. Part number is covered by model name but model-name will be renamed to part-number for sake of clarity.

Discussions if we could have a generic approach for the attributes per component instead of defining subset of attributes for different components. An attribute not supported is not reported by a given component.Agreed to use same attributes schema defined in RFC8348 for all components but then one component instance (e.g. a port) is only reporting some of the attributes that makes sense.

Decision to remove state information (e.g. admin-state, oper-state) because here we are focusing on physical inventory and not logical inventory (RFC8348 is a management model including logical state information).

Agreed that rack-location and ne-location are specific with absolute location information while location shall be kept generic for components under NE indicating relative position of the component with respect to its parent component.

YANG tree updated during the call. Last version will be uploaded in github by Yuchaode.

italobusi commented 2 years ago

2022-06-15 Network Inventory weekly call

Continued review and updates to the YANG model proposal by Chaode:

italobusi commented 2 years ago

2022-07-06 Network Inventory weekly call

Need to add for each component the parent-rel-pos attribute defined in RFC8348 that could be used to know the position of the component within its parent component.

italobusi commented 2 years ago

The analysis has been completed before IETF 114.

italobusi commented 1 year ago

2022-09-28 Network Inventory weekly call

italobusi commented 1 year ago

[x] @jbouqui153 @sergiobelotti : check the correspondence of RFC component attributes with the OpenConfig model and see if any attribute is missing

2022-10-13 Network Inventory weekly call

Jeff has provided a table to compare the attributes in RFC8348 with the attributes defined in OpenConfig and T-API: Attributes_ Openconfig Jeff.xlsx

The list has been reviewed in detail during the call

Conclusions: