Draft: draft-ietf-opsawg-l2nm

Commentary: RFC8299 and  use " inbound - bandwidth " and " outbound - bandwidth " from the point of view of the customer site . L3NM also uses this terminology from the point of view of the customer 's site .  flips the terminology , for example " inbound " is from PE 's perspective . To avoid confusion , it would better in both L3NM and  to use explicit terminology so that the direction is obvious , e.g. " PE - to - CE - bandwidth " " CE - to - PE - bandwidth " In the description field , it would be good to say which field in RFC8299 / RFC8466 this corresponds to . 
 practically it is ingress - Policer and egress - Shaper , because the BW is controlled only from the PE side . in addition there is policer and shaper per CoS / Queue which should be addressed . 
 I guess you meant " input - bandwidth " and " output - bandwidth " . We do have the following for the L3NM : ' inbound - bandwidth ' : Indicates , in bits per second ( bps ) , the inbound bandwidth of the connection ( i.e. , download bandwidth from the service provider to the site ) . ' outbound - bandwidth ' : Indicates , in bps , the outbound bandwidth of the connection ( i.e. , upload bandwidth from the site to the service provider ) .  flips the terminology , for example " inbound " is from PE 's perspective . ' svc - inbound - bandwidth ' indicates the inbound bandwidth of the connection ( i.e. , download bandwidth from the service provider to the site ) . ' svc - outbound - bandwidth ' indicates the outbound bandwidth of the connection ( i.e. , upload bandwidth from the site to the service provider ) . Please note that we do already have the following in the common I - D : " Indicates support for the inbound bandwidth in a VPN . That is , support for specifying the download bandwidth from the service provider network to the VPN site . Note that the L3SM uses ' input ' to identify the same feature . That terminology should be deprecated in favor of the one defined in this module . " ;  was echoed in the L3NM , e.g. , " Note that the L3SM uses ' input- -bandwidth ' to refer to the same concept . " ; 
 Hi Med In it says as follows , maybe it is a typo ? container svc - outbound - bandwidth { if - feature " vpn - common : outbound - bw " ; description " From the PE perspective , the service outbound bandwidth of the connection . " ; But I would urge you to change the terminology to " PE - to - CE - bandwidth " /"CE - to - PE - bandwidth " to make it super - explicit , the current terminology has been causing endless confusion to implementers ( I realise it 's inherited from the service models , but changing the terminology in LXNM would cure the problem well ) 
 This is a typo . It needs to be fixed . Will move this one to the list . 
 Julian , please check the PR at 
  , this is great , thanks ! Can it be changed similarly in L3NM as well ? Julian
Paragraph (version A):
'svc-inbound-bandwidth' indicates the inbound bandwidth of the
connection (i.e., download bandwidth from the service provider to
the site).
Paragraph (version A):
'svc-outbound-bandwidth' indicates the outbound bandwidth of the
connection (i.e., upload bandwidth from the site to the service
provider).
Paragraph (version B):
'svc-pe-to-ce-bandwidth' indicates the inbound bandwidth of the
connection (i.e., download bandwidth from the service provider to
the site).
Paragraph (version B):
'svc-ce-to-pe-bandwidth' indicates the outbound bandwidth of the
connection (i.e., upload bandwidth from the site to the service
provider).