Re: [dhcwg] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

ianfarrer@gmx.com Mon, 24 January 2022 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <ianfarrer@gmx.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 373553A0C77; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 06:49:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mV3vtbElwNRy; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 06:49:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A4DB3A0C7D; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 06:49:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1643035767; bh=s9uW8I95GhhsBXnci/9RLu4EtQeU8HrtAFJ9VUDuOnI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=DHHEgwjRLzEHLb1Rn8oxvp3ZfG4Z7d5ffB8f/FycL+2orQDR+Bv+/YesTaiN+wHWv N5vsGSVi4sKkazrK9LVhdplzejWWVq/FNmkx3eHDjabCkQoaSc98W40ffRt5iTsnLj JMUvaO2Rh5nrBzMrCe96g4PXDq3Fyro0FfaNY048=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([78.35.54.88]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mf07E-1meIjV0Fkw-00gXA2; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 15:49:27 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\))
From: ianfarrer@gmx.com
In-Reply-To: <163955145413.10392.15987440783848564312@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 15:49:26 +0100
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, dhc-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang@ietf.org, dhcwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E91C467D-BF3A-46AE-8383-A65671E3FA17@gmx.com>
References: <163955145413.10392.15987440783848564312@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Murray Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.40.0.1.81)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:gjr3Tq3w8mDJx35ZhLIP9FclTTzCdKx6eD7NcCWW55NcOJCJxdp aDLrfFCO7L0bVb7o0gF1Ikevl3WwwEgyTnAkPR177amLHkMJUWXnLsuQyu/TWjhaUFFhceo qCR1bM6t1entimfESk118IMXa+cqbMigeOXoxyeKy9VYn0r6VtbI/hCiY6VAsWfMXfuiSdi rnIkVJ9YZanN65LLRvetQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:BmsGVemIDLI=:2M5WDVwefDcRpowGSV42hn fo1qd4LpJtvHYhTaYSE9BEgTC07nfUATMgSHYhvXwSbVF1digg+kbon2dqPfXERFMZXq3pbaq sur+tyVG86lu9Dwyf/K7JpF0l9dqQNa1HCweWql4ar525YgQo430BYzYX2ACHk1Q3OVS//YkY gBSDR3KjvZCl5XpaJjqLvL4X/WVbI9opvTg4zx/PayD8AhAMgYwhMVOFDeNMbsaRt7S4cQFOR jmG1YTCrd9vKLdmtzp4sZHsNLinjEbf5mcx423SHoE3I4EAaMtraIRn7BF+Q7fr+jRDpmZOv4 uix9Ds6DA75XDbqM4WfkqdthhZJWAH5sfX/1ux4R+GO4tkqCihXVLcO0qGRmKLwBjv98wUp9O kk5t7BK+6duAN0K5yDGrH7ymOOk/xpdeXnKezlfK1hdlJU60rGpuvZVuANxM7l1YXfFFTVvJg Ngmhhsw3GUIhjRFb5nzThWbqPBIPY+cnArU59rn+/niFsc1GeJ7sJZGwwr9nNjy+mjOLKAgRW c5/yO3AG1xtUEs2WkB4ETSoX0MOOVjdo9w3146vkJ/trfKDd8LLnuLO7R8MyQtTBr31PdbmUT fFo/OK64I89zjxqXDQFt2Zwt969Il1KppVva0HR1yxdrJkO5q/42mCdcJDWj8xZKC7uN+TgS2 fbeJDOJ95jKJ1HoZ8j/2qasu10RPm2YiENKxCjqCBHnivUCF/rCQ+kIAjUX5oEa9bkY+FKGig wKHFUo6fyxdOrC40JwBpjkNSGto0JAyMjVT8xQUxZ0fpDrhuimDjCoBC+ACz1WxsZdaOEyFhe MOw0r9BX3uAgmr5U+YWPBijsbj2Zc5pMNgQiOrI9sX4B3xhkOrNXXRHUnVU0IClgdlVfiqS5f EDHssHGNP0qIddxQ/ULqtzZCGl/DWr1y+p3YS5uQvL15u0g887ovVaRcgH2DUY1lSV+4c3hNt 6qcGpPFvgQpQ4bzZNjuyb+MUzvxEzCyPACjb/dyiyE/1TExVBB197vZWS8lPKtpvPAMzBvf2B DJlxW5TCPFoRigfCpwcyilTPaM9+3cTcRK0kEDpkho1uEWuv++50ajJgW8uydDG6JAQeelZKg a8t7bUq5LoCg3Q=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/w6Qb0IMOUbcuJQ7gjk3ol1fs3q4>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Dynamic Host Configuration <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 14:49:36 -0000

Hi Murray,

First of all, many thanks for your review and my apologies that it’s taken so long for me to
reply.

Please see inline below.

Thanks,
Ian

> On 15. Dec 2021, at 07:57, Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24: Discuss
> 
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This should be easy to resolve, but we have to ask as it's pretty important:
> 
> Question 7 of the shepherd writeup, about the authors and BCP 78/79, appears
> not to have been answered.  Were these declarations made?
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I suggest breaking Section 6 into two subsections, one for each batch of
> registry operations.

[if - done]

> 
> A possibly ignorant question about YANG modules: Since RFCs 3319 and 8987 are
> referenced from within the module itself, shouldn't they be normative
> references?

[if - RFC3319 is only referenced as it is used by an example module showing how
Additional DHCPv6 options can be modelled and augmented. As this is in the appendices, I think
It’s right to be informative.

RFC8987 does need to be implemented by the relay and is referenced in the ietf-dhcpv6-relay
Module, so this is now a normative reference.]

> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg