Re: [CCAMP] WG adoption poll on draft-ye-ccamp-mw-topo-yang-02

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

Daniele

Past experience tells me that the I-D will be adopted anyway so I do not
say support or no!

Past experience also tells me that this is a good moment to flag
concerns, that they get a wider audience at this time (like all the
authors instead of just one penholder) and are more likely to be
addressed promptly, while the issues that I raise are still fresh in my
mind; so this is a pattern of behaviour I am likely to persist in.

I do find missing references troublesome; I am currently looking at a
last call
where the description does not make sense but know that I have read a
understandable explanation in an MPLS RFC some years ago but how will I
find it?  Having references for anything makes it so much easier so I
tend to ask for them early on, before I delve into the technicalities.

In passing, a lawyer once advised me to be wary of a unanimous vote,
that if everyone agreed then it was probably not a good idea, so I
stopped being concerned about being in a minority of one!

HTH

Tom Petch


----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniele Ceccarelli" <[e-mail]>
To: "tom petch" <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>
Cc: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2019 8:06 AM

> Hi Tom,
>
> Thanks a lot for your thorough review. I would consider your comments
> blocking for a WG last call but not for a WG adoption...where the WG
is
> supposed to start working on the document.  Would you agree?
>
> Thanks,
> Daniele
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tom petch <[e-mail]>
> Sent: den 23 januari 2019 11:58
>
> Uh huh; a YANG module from the Routing Area so you know what happens
next!
>
> Requirements Language lacks reference RFC8174
>
> Copyright (c) 2018 (I know, the I-D is October 22, 2018:-)
>
> This document defines a YANG data model
> lacks a reference for YANG language RFC
>
> 3.1.  The YANG Tree
> no reference for the YANG Tree diagram RFC
>
> YANG Module
>
> YANG 'file' lacks date
>
> YANG import statements lack references which then need adding to the
I-D
> References and which then need a mention in the body of the I-D lest
you get
> a warning for an unused reference
>
> reference "draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount: YANG Schema Mount"; wrong
format
> - you need something like
>          "RFC YYYY: YANG Schema Mount";
> Note to RFC Editor please replace YYYY with the number assigned to
> draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount
>
>     ID-draft authors:
> hopefully this will move beyond the status of ID:-)
>
> no copyright statement
>
>             list mw-link-availability{
>               key "availability";
>               leaf availability {
>                 type decimal64 {
>
> interesting choice of key type - I am unclear how this will be used -
could
> do with a more expansiive description
>
>      augment "/nw:networks/nw:network/nw:network-types/"
>           + "tet:te-topology" {
>       container mw-topology {
>         presence "indicates a topology type of microwave."; no YANG
'when'
> and it is a presence container so will all boxes with this YANG module
have
> mw-topology for all te-topology?
>
> IANA has assigned
> It is more common to say
> IANA is asked to assign
> and let them make the change when they have done what you ask
>
> 7.2.  Informative References
>
>    [I-D.ietf-netmod-schema-mount]
>    [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te-topo]
>
> since you are importing from these, I believe that they have to be
Normative
> References.
>
> Tom Petch
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daniele Ceccarelli" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Cc: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 4:36 PM
>
>