[apps-discuss] Apps Area review of draft-ietf-netmod-interfaces-cfg-10

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Tue, 30 April 2013 04:44 UTC

Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 114EC21F9AF4 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:44:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.357
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.357 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 13Kmg9+2jZGX for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:44:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ve0-x22b.google.com (mail-ve0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B06D221F9AE1 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:44:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ve0-f171.google.com with SMTP id oy12so76502veb.16 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:44:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:x-originating-ip:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=XUzOC26uJ0W1nDVGQEXiHZGTH68hGMPIsvFm2cA+WWc=; b=RT+i3nbsf2F2cZIi7elp+DFfmdcSr9k/UaEbKECJ39Pwo7wD+5WxEj11JVldF/c1z6 DLqaQIxqKH5Web7vzNPoHKGbDDZyjapKuwvCoN1tSvKGUCIg1XJf+2r8to8KiP9EvPfb bxh3E7ss9yPaAp3uWoyAYGpvtRfEnDN7CYJyp+itAViUw/2dMEo2+cQs832A84UxKCT7 1V0ZvheiQirPWS5eb/fBGZMMjAlrrqKXnk+FKys5dExYAoflQeuaxwPtN0CRPjTUiNHW R3+HtKzbpPX924v86bwtXc1oV/vmX143nFqX5rNGDeoMWRDEV7hSxzarq4Qoh9DpH3aV C2Jg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id k5mr34673891vcf.40.1367297049364; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:44:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:44:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: []
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:44:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6iu_BzHCJxJnXCEU_fRuwkp=UghLwG7hsgaMKMFSq=yzag@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-netmod-interfaces-cfg.all@tools.ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2ca40ee1d6d04db8ca655"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnMoxi4/vs5TWJyI62Lrzmay15u8vrOvS5PpTlGlyfaqymH2Ahr3lEByRC3rVIYqsrQv5uZ
Subject: [apps-discuss] Apps Area review of draft-ietf-netmod-interfaces-cfg-10
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 04:44:20 -0000

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for this
draft (for background on appsdir, please see 
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate ).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you
may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD
before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-netmod-interfaces-cfg-10
Title: A YANG Data Model for Interface Management
Reviewer: Tim Bray
Review Date: April 29

Summary: I see no objections to publication of this document as a
standards-track RFC

Note: I’m not an expert in Netconf/YANG stuff, so really my only comments
are on style, coherence, and XML-sanity.  However, the presentation was
clear enough to be be comprehensible to the non-expert.

Major Issues: Don’t see any

Minor Issues: Not obvious why all the examples are shuffled off into
Appendices, they’re pretty essential to understanding the spec.


3. “The data model in the module "ietf-interfaces" has the following
structure...” - This is the first time the label “ietf-interfaces” has
appeared. Is it a well-known name from another spec or are we defining it
here?  If the former, please reference. If the latter, maybe say something
like “We define a module named "ietf-interfaces" whose data model has the
following structure...

3.1 “The data model for interfaces presented in this document uses a flat
list of interfaces.” - does this mean that the model in section 3. should
have “interface*” rather than just “interface” as a child of “interfaces”?
I have to say that this looks like a hash table indexed by name rather than
a “flat list” in the conventional software sense.