[Detnet] Some more Comments on detnet-yang-15 Re: [Last-Call] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-yang-14

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

On 23/12/2021 11:40, tom petch wrote:
Also

"IP six tuple"
perhaps 'sextuple' That said, I do not know what the six are and cannot 
find a reference to six in either RFC8939 or RFC8964


"   Outgoing is viewed as going up the stack from"
Looking at fig 1 I would have assumed the opposite, going down the 
stack; perhaps IETF versus IEEE.


" enum copy-from-app-flow {
     description
       "This type means copy the app-flow sequence number to the "
Mmm it looks like an enum to me and not a type


"  enum generate-by-detnet-flow {
      description
         "This type means generate the sequence number by the "
Ditto


"     grouping detnet-flow-spec {
        choice detnet-flow-type {
          case ip-detnet-flow {
          case mpls-detnet-flow { "
elsewhere the case are 'ip' and 'mpls'; is this different?


      "RFC 9016 Section 5.5, IEEE802.1Q";
I would find this clearer with the two references on two separate lines


"       F-label for DetNet service or service-to-forwarding "
Perhaps a reference to "RFC 8964 Section 4.2.3";

Tom Petch


> Borrowing a useful cc: with a related topic
>
> two documents in the YANG module need adding to the I-D References
> RFC8938
> IEEE 802.1Qcx-2020
>
> contact URL
> insecure, obsolete - https://datatracker ...
>
> Editor: Mach Chen
> not in the authors of the I-D
>
> TLP out of date
>
> Reference: this ID when published
> Reference: "RFC XXXX: Deterministic Networking (DetNet) YANG Model
>
>
> Tom Petch
>
>
> On 09/11/2021 20:06, Xufeng Liu via Datatracker wrote:
>> Reviewer: Xufeng Liu
>> Review result: Ready with Nits
>>
>> Thanks to authors for addressing the previous review comments.
>>
>> The updates look good. The followings are a few additional nits:
>>
>> 1) In the model, “container flow-spec” has been changed to “container
>> traffic-spec”, but the description has not been updated, shown as below:
>>
>>           container traffic-spec {
>>             description
>>               "Flow-specification specifies how the Source transmits
>>                packets for the flow.  This is the promise/request of the
>>                Source to the network.  The network uses this flow
>>                specification to allocate resources and adjust queue
>>                parameters in network nodes.";
>>
>> 2) Most names of list and leaf-list have been fixes. The following
>> three were
>> missed: “leaf-list member-apps” should be “leaf-list member-app”
>> “leaf-list
>> member-services” should be “leaf-list member-service” “leaf-list
>> member-fwd-sublayers” should be “leaf-list member-fwd-sublayer”
>>
>> 3) Section 10.  Security Considerations would need to include a list of
>> “sensitive or vulnerable” nodes.  RFC 8349 shows an example.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> - Xufeng