References to L0 data plane standards should be ITU-T Recommendations

[dieterbeller]

There are many L0 data plane references in layer0-types to IETF RFCs. The standards, however, defining the L0 data plane are usually ITU-T Recommendations. Example: the flex DWDM grid is defined in ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1. References should point directly to the standard defining the entity as opposed to an IETF RFC that in turn points to the related ITU-T Recommendation.

[haomianzheng]

This is a good catch. Firstly let me confirm, does this comment apply only to the YANG code (in section 3)? or also to the description text such as in section 2?

As YANG doctor suggested, we should list the reference "as much as we can", we also don't have any limitation on how many reference we can have in the YANG code.

Basically, the data plane recommendations for DWDM/CWDM and flexi-grid parameters, which are needed for the identities in layer0-types, are specified in G.694.1. So a typical revision is proposed as follow:

OLD:
identity layer0-grid-type {
description
"Layer 0 grid type";
reference
"RFC6163:Framework for GMPLS and Path Computation Element
(PCE) Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs)";
}

New:
identity layer0-grid-type {
description
"Layer 0 grid type";
reference
"RFC6163:Framework for GMPLS and Path Computation Element
(PCE) Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs),
ITU-T G.694.1 (02/2012): Spectral grids for WDM applications:
DWDM frequency grid";
}

A full set of reference update can be found at the updated pull request.
https://github.com/ietf-ccamp-wg/draft-ietf-ccamp-layer0-types/tree/8e0d1878b6a0a8e2cc675343175ba269799bf9e6

[haomianzheng]

The YANG model part is good on the reference. See 10acf68.
Editorial changes on the draft text will be shown in the later session, and won't be updated on Github.

[italobusi]

The YANG model part is good on the reference. See 10acf68.
Editorial changes on the draft text will be shown in the later session, and won't be updated on Github.

I agree, this issue seems resolved with 10acf68

I have linked this open issue with PR#3 so it will be automatically closed when the PR#3 is merged

@dieterbeller : do you agree?