Re: [CCAMP] WG last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang-15

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

What you could do  ...

From: CCAMP <[e-mail]> on behalf of tom petch <[e-mail]>
Sent: 07 September 2022 10:00
From: Daniele Ceccarelli <[e-mail]>
Sent: 06 September 2022 13:33

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the review.

Few comments from my side:

- There isn't that much that we can do about the structure imposed by the TE-topology other than follow the path already established.

<tp2>
... is to add comment lines to the tree diagram.  Because the YANG is almost all uses, I find it hard to see what is happening and so need the tree diagram more.  I then need to match the YANG module and the tree diagram - the former has comment lines (good)  the latter does not so adding the same comment lines to the tree diagram would make it easier to switch between the two and see what is going on.

Tom Petch

- English: unfortunately many of us are non English native speakers, but luckily the RFC editor is extremely helpful here. His/her thorough review usually leads to well written documents.
- References: G.709 is already part of the references.

<tp>

Disagree
In the references I see G.709 March 2020
In the document I see  G.709/Y.1331 February 2016.
I cannot see these as the same.

Tom Petch

Thanks
Daniele

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tom petch <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, 5 September 2022 13:02
> From: CCAMP <[e-mail]> on behalf of Italo Busi
> <Italo.Busi=[e-mail]>
> Sent: 05 September 2022 07:35
>
> Hi Daniele, Fatai,
>
> As co-author, I think the draft is now ready for publication
>
> <tp>
> Mmm that's a challenge.
>
> Indeed it is a challenge to review for the usual reasons, the structure imposed by
> te-topology, the imports, the uses, the many changes in its history  and so on.  I
> tried to match it up with RFC8795 s.6 and failed; I may try again in the next week
> or two.
>
> The English I find flaky, as in mismatch of singular and plural and in some unusual
> spellings  'Costant Bit Rate' or with 'The client-facing is an indicator' or 'support-
> client-signal' for 'supported..'
>
> More concretely
> G.709/Y.1331
> should be in the I-D references IMO.
>
> Tom Petch
>
> Thanks, Italo
>
> From: Daniele Ceccarelli <[e-mail]>
> Sent: lunedì 22 agosto 2022 21:00
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [CCAMP] WG last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang-15
>
> CCAMP,
>
> the IPR declaration collection has been successfully completed and we can move
> to the next step together with draft-ietf-ccamp-layer1-types.
>
> This starts a 2 weeks working group last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang-
> 15 The last call ends on Monday September 5th. Please send you comments to
> the CCAMP mailing list.
>
> All the IPR declarations from authors and contributors have been collected and
> can be found in the history of the document:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang/history/
> Please note that no IPR was disclosed against this draft.
>
> If interested, please volunteer to be the shepherd of the draft (authors
> excluded).
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Daniele & Fatai


_______________________________________________
CCAMP mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp