-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 656
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add status flags for transceiver host lanes and media channels #1197
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
/gcbrun |
Hi @ejbrever , can you give this a review for us? |
No major YANG version changes in commit 2ce5b4b |
39d2d69
to
84a08c9
Compare
/gcbrun |
It is good to see some of the failure modes start getting added directly within places in the model as we had intended long ago when we proposed the alarms model. So happy to see that. I'm good with the three under the physical-channels. I was hoping to discuss more on the new host-channelslist because I have some concern this conflicts with the terminal-device/logical-channels. The thinking was that electrical/digital things went to the logical-channels, whereas anything analog/physical is intended for the physical-channels. This feels like we are creating a new list that overlaps with logical channels. One option could be to use logical channels (which we definitely do for coherent optics, such as ZR). Another option I was wondering about is if these actually do fit in physical-channel? tx-los for instance sounds more physical for example anyway? |
That's not how I read the CMIS spec [1]. In Table 8-77 that I referenced, it states that Tx LOS and Tx CDR LOL are indexed by host lane, not by media lane (channel), in contrast with the other flags. For some media types (such as 400GBASE-FR4 in my CLI output above), these won't map one-to-one, so we can't use the same list I suppose you could read this section of openconfig-platform-transceiver.yang:
as meaning that an optical module should always use [1] http://www.qsfp-dd.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/CMIS5p0.pdf |
I'm having a hard time seeing the references to logical channels in https://github.com/openconfig/public/blob/master/release/models/optical-transport/openconfig-terminal-device.yang as matching up with host lanes. For example, I've never heard of "grooming" being applied to electrical host lanes. And some of the descriptions of LLDP-related nodes in that YANG module seem to refer to PDUs being sent on individual logical channels. But we wouldn't think of a packet as being sent on a single host lane out of 4 or 8, if the port was configured at maximum speed. |
Ah, thanks for bearing with me and providing more detail. I think this makes sense to introduce a place for host lane telemetry. I suppose host lanes would always be read-only since there is nothing configurable on this side? I was initially thinking on the other side of the transceiver which is where the terminal-device model starts to come into play, but that's unrelated here. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
That's right. |
Setting last call for Nov 5, 2024 |
/gcbrun |
3f3cfea
to
597ef60
Compare
These flags are defined in the CMIS spec. Some of them are also defined in the earlier specs for management interfaces of SFP+ and QSFP+ modules. Some of the flags are specific to media channels. They are defined in the existing list /components/component/transceiver/physical-channels/channel. Other flags are specific to electrical host lanes. This change adds a new analogous list /components/component/transceiver/host-lanes/lane to hold them.
597ef60
to
3345b12
Compare
/gcbrun |
Change Scope
the existing list
/components/component/transceiver/physical-channels/channel
./components/component/transceiver/host-lanes/lane
to hold them, analogous tophysical-channels/channel
.Tree View
(including the unchanged beginning of the channel list, for context)
Platform Implementations