[CCAMP] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang-25

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Sun, 12 July 2020 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1DB63A0B47 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 08:15:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wg7h0TtGGgmu for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 08:15:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy10-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy10-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.20.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48BD33A0B24 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 08:15:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmgw11.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.9.0.11]) by gproxy10.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7041408E1 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:15:36 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id udhYjanH6pSV4udhYj6ZPv; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:15:36 -0600
X-Authority-Reason: nr=8
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=Z9bC4kZA c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10:nop_ipv6 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10:nop_charset_1 a=_RQrkK6FrEwA:10:nop_rcvd_month_year a=Vy_oeq2dmq0A:10:endurance_base64_authed_username_1 a=HLvPDLHGFjgA:10:nop_election2020_name_subject a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=71oK6CGHiXvCkhcOMeUA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10:nop_charset_2 a=-RoEEKskQ1sA:10:nop_election2020_name_body a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Cc:To:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=TSWYzR1Juw2RE3dVYLTRDp+tllRjZwCHq+GuO6wiwPk=; b=n3eiCt4lcpjYLh6BOe4L+k3or9 o2hvFA9wjXB49PYSJnqEl1ahofOBunph+nlY44HL08A6kJqGixFw22Gp1ypOFHZAZdUCwDREVg/e1 fnxFmbH7bs0ZNkYbqGdy8XMER;
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (port=15341 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1judhX-0003fQ-Uw; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:15:36 -0600
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
To: Routing ADs <rtg-ads@ietf.org>
Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang.all@ietf.org, CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <45db451d-9f8e-7a0d-d275-de1fd383cda6@labn.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 11:15:34 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-Source-L: Yes
X-Exim-ID: 1judhX-0003fQ-Uw
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: ([IPv6:::1]) [127.0.0.1]:15341
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 4
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/XHoqBbrNY7ZONJC_aY2Pm0DZZjQ>
Subject: [CCAMP] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang-25
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 15:15:41 -0000

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. 
The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related 
drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and 
sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide 
assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing 
Directorate, please see 
​http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir


Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it 
would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF 
Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through 
discussion or by updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang-25.txt
Reviewer: Lou Berger
Review Date: July 12, 2020
IETF LC End Date: date-if-known
Intended Status: Proposed Standard

Summary:

I have a minor concern about this document that I think should be 
resolved before publication.

Comments:

This seems to be a straight forward YANG model that augments 
draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo with basic WSON information.  I think it 
may be hard for those not intimate with optical switching, and TE to 
follow, but no so for those working with these technologies.  I have one 
question/issue that I think that should be resolved before publication.

Major Issues:

None

Minor Issues:

I may be missing something, but it seems to me that there are number of 
elements/leaves marked rw that should be ro.  For example are  
reconfigurable-node or grid-type really going to be writable?  If I 
understand the model correctly, there will be some cases there leaves 
under grid type will be writable -- in this case shouldn't the grid-type 
case  statements be limited to the label-restriction/grid-type?

Again, please let me know if I'm missing something.

Nit:

I'm marking this comment as a nit as it is somewhat stylistic. I'm not a 
fan of defining groupings that are unlikely to be reused.  'grouping 
wson-node-attributes' is used once - I suggest just moving the container 
(or even just the leaf) to the one place it is used in the model.

I also note that the YANGdoctor review comments are out of date and 
should be revisited.

That's it!

Lou