[dhcwg] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24: (with COMMENT)

[Robert Wilton via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for publishing another YANG module.

I found this document well written, and in particular I thought that the
section on options extensibility and examples in the appendix to be thoughtful
and helpful.  I ​only have a few minor (non blocking) comments on the structure
of the YANG module that you may wish to consider:

1. You may want to consider putting the counters under a container to group
them together, and perhaps to make it easier for a targeted telemetry
subscription.

2. The paths on your RPCs and top level Notifications are using relative paths
- it would probably be clearer to use absolute paths here.

3. I would remove "container" from the Option description strings, to improve
help string readability.

4. Please make sure that you fix the 3 idnits YANG warnings (e.g., alignment of
the revision-date to the extracted file date).

Perhaps in a future draft the IETF will manage to standardize common
configuration for the class selection function since that will help interop but
I can appreciate that is tricky to get consensus on if the existing models/CLIs
are far apart, and you seem to have taken a pragmatic approach here.

Regards,
Rob