Re: [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24 Fri, 19 November 2021 07:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F953A0C79; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 23:18:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R0RQxG6ViA3K; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 23:18:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24FCF3A0C6B; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 23:18:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=badeba3b8450; t=1637306288; bh=9euKfHDSoF1uETxJm6OvAb42sTatlAK5f0ag2QdIcEQ=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=RuwUXCbNVvSw2SMYI+yo4pXhTeP0SmT0YbwRO/IYI/7Ry5lWrfABqJfCelcvNOeBP TSZt62xXg0jMKmI+qn0ugcY35UtyQHzI/a9JLRPBkuR+f9BbW/T3nata/JpOpITNaf mGlHph2SqstzHdbe8CYSlx1CBPDnpfdFvbr4cDOs=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from ([]) by (mrgmx105 []) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MulmF-1mVbvf0WY7-00rlrg; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 08:18:08 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.\))
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 08:18:02 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Will LIU <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:CQ+CwMcpa/9GuE3WkEl5qjWr+E7/MHi0+HjzIxDgFscWU0MaElo vrx3NSq5SOTkF/+gIWHxPpqLUOTT97p7gXX9y6hkvDl0/LD2Zt9RYLuNw0ega1hPRjYzL05 TNabBPGn4Mnsf3oSPnLo3dWbPvCfbHENIikDOGD+savBB/y3a3qBC+/wmceLJ0+WjtZ/vBY d7qRdZEkREl4OF6/bdUOQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:vPLpUt6d0/Q=:CJjLvivK9y0c0R/oAThEMg Zp+DsPHb61o/4AH/hQS3MRgX/aTomHhMX5wbEJmXrpiyjJVChbWZUWEbS4E/+ZXKGlc0MW2d5 mh1H6VQRsouwXjQgDZ8+3NWB1ZvC5lHlGyn3BtgCrF8KfCbw36QmGlv0Mubmm5e1OjlkOSt6c mowG7ubAcBv8UZX9KDcKLT5L5JOBTXEoJqQdItSHuOggOg6nWu4mihsgXgQl03qnxzS7ydY2n z5WPZ01drN4t46Ckxefi25IRYUIk4q74xUMGLEh+eHa2GEo3xqFrS6m/ZF7atqJn7HoOWfN0L UMsosmDexF3jfD8SsnB1/XhhPMbuTyogW1QxGzjE2NlDJeUndtKAcX4zPBQb8DAmA61nQbn+a vwiBUKNElzxGnghDj2hE7Gj09tWBTqsLYg1hn2DzoZbEE7ekKICq6Cc/Vm5HAjiyS/KgY533G /+nT/EJm5/p/EfvxaXedbSb/hMcT6WB8inmFVxsQeY/UQq6CMPV5qimCytBFIARM8grUjKbYP EVg2AYGvqvV6fIFR3a2+PuL7a9D0Wt9ZIV3tO0SaLJWCDOK+JhGXQ/+bT4/cpsXEJLNDaxSZi GCIkz+Sj0WHYh+Ebv4j5JY1I0r4ZgcLzyxkIg9KWik3CZKWOfmzEc2JAPfeYjjuRieM03l1Al xDVMJMJ7n8Qfl4y311s3RDZA46795AgSsRsnGDZAR7b8vBm275GPZrhmde4kEO4ztmO3xP7Te oNe+Gb/4nA3dlwbM9Ikix/3V6hzGGlIDH1T1mtKOICs3VCpwk2r4XNadwPxiXv1KPf6yIuaIc kqB/xLZTqxmEDrVDIOluCw2RTNPwGnjp92Ljk7AqY+ajbRyXHhPw6+4VmCB0bIqNj3GX9HoQ1 cs5r28LrB3J7NVwAt9+U73Mfedo6gm59rJ6wLuPwLSr3C+TcK1E4QpHo6yIb+TgXSvKtK3zWQ 2Me+/k5F/gb9rlcSB3+4ptBbiHO7gZyQhUCacN4/vVhcBwnv8EI5WNnMK5UGJ40nLPrGqe/lG 8OskZB+Ii7+36wLWLCC4gBvhxxbI56jDRdWRVkRQhv4PxGIqIvgcLkVP+wQ8qRnigdU2qzpsN 6pHzDtsTFJ9Khg=
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Dynamic Host Configuration <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:18:30 -0000

Hi Will

Many thanks for your review and comments. Please see inline below.

Best regards,

> On 18. Nov 2021, at 10:37, Will LIU via Datatracker <> wrote:
> Reviewer: Will LIU
> Review result: Has Nits
> Hi all,
> I have reviewed draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24 as part of the Operational
> directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by
> the IESG.  These comments were written with the intent of improving the
> operational aspects of the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last
> call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors
> and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call
> comments.
> “This document describes YANG data modules for the configuration and
>   management of DHCPv6 (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6
>   RFC8415) servers, relays, and clients.”
> My overall view of the document is 'Has Nits'.
> ** Technical **
> Page54,
> 1. The DHCPv6 server may be bound to an interface to specify the DHCPv6 address
> pool of the corresponding interface.

[if - Interface configuration and binding the server function to specific interfaces/addresses is
not covered in the ietf-dhc6-server module. There is a lot of variance in the way that individual 
implementations configure this (e.g. server/router/BNG), and also the class-selection logic that
defines how an individual request’s address/prefix pool and options are selected that this best
left to the implementor to define implementation specific YANG to cover these areas. 

Examples of vendor specific configuration modules for the server’s base configuration and 
class-selector logic are given in Appendixes C & D.

> 2. The key of container address-pools and
> container prefix-pools in the DHCPv6 server may be changed to pool-name.

[if - ‘pool-id’ was originally typed as being uint32 with the intention that it was just a unique
ID number for the pool. The type got changed to string due to a recent review comment,
But I think the intended use remains the same - it is a unique identifier for the pool, whether
the user choses a numeric or a string based identifier as suits their requirements.

My feeling is that pool-id is a suitable name for this function, but would be happy to change if
there is a good reason to use pool-name.

> ** Editorial **
> No.
> Regards,
> Will (Shucheng LIU)