[TSC-124] RFC8345 defines ietf-network(-topology), which we should adopt Created: 02/Jul/18 Updated: 30/Apr/19 |
|
| Status: | Open |
| Project: | tsc |
| Component/s: | General |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Epic | Priority: | Medium |
| Reporter: | Robert Varga | Assignee: | Unassigned |
| Resolution: | Unresolved | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||
| Epic Name: | Adopt ietf-network | ||||||||||||
| Description |
|
OpenDaylight uses ietf-topology as one of the central models. This model has finally been standardized as ietf-network and ietf-network-topology. We need to drive adoption of this model in four key areas:
This obviously impacts our NBI, but the differences are largely mechanic. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Robert Varga [ 03/Jul/18 ] |
|
Impact analysis of ietf-network, showing the scope of work which is being done on top of these models: |
| Comment by Luis Gomez [ 03/Jul/18 ] |
|
Some concerns were risen today around the user impact and amount of work for this change. Would it be possible to know:
|
| Comment by Robert Varga [ 03/Jul/18 ] |
|
The model changes very few things in real terms:
In terms on time – NETCONF took ~8 hours to migrate, including UTs and adjustment of SFC to cope and an update to the model (which broke the patch again). |