Re: [Dots] AD review of draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-25

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Thu, 14 February 2019 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
X-Original-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D089B130F0E; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 06:36:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 7OzZIvCej6DI; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 06:36:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orange.com (mta240.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.66.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9BC7130D7A; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 06:36:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from opfedar01.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.2]) by opfedar27.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 440f9N0tq2z2y22; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:36:56 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme6.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.13.38]) by opfedar01.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 440f9M711NzBrLs; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:36:55 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::e878:bd0:c89e:5b42]) by OPEXCAUBM5C.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::393d:418c:3f1d:991d%21]) with mapi id 14.03.0435.000; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:36:55 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-dots-data-channel@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dots-data-channel@ietf.org>, "dots@ietf.org" <dots@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Dots] AD review of draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-25
Thread-Index: AQHUw8UDWHs4kATxxUerfdSNDWB7qqXfXJwg
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:36:55 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302EA1F061@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <20190213164622.GX56447@kduck.mit.edu> <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFC01857C1DEB@marathon> <20190213175309.GA56447@kduck.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20190213175309.GA56447@kduck.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.114.13.247]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/38O2WlfzXh0xUxYSut_kwglcibU>
Subject: Re: [Dots] AD review of draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-25
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for discussion of DDoS Open Threat Signaling \(DOTS\) technology and directions." <dots.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dots/>
List-Post: <mailto:dots@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:37:00 -0000

Hi Roman, all, 

The use of integer (not "integer") and "string" (not string) is on purpose because these examples are depicting the schema.

I update the text to clearly indicate schema examples. 

Hope this is OK.

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Benjamin Kaduk [mailto:kaduk@mit.edu]
> Envoyé : mercredi 13 février 2019 18:53
> À : Roman Danyliw
> Cc : draft-ietf-dots-data-channel@ietf.org; dots@ietf.org
> Objet : Re: [Dots] AD review of draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-25
> 
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 05:35:01PM +0000, Roman Danyliw wrote:
> > Hi Ben and Data Channel Authors!
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dots [mailto:dots-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benjamin Kaduk
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 11:46 AM
> > > To: draft-ietf-dots-data-channel@ietf.org
> > > Cc: dots@ietf.org
> > > Subject: [Dots] AD review of draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-25
> >
> > > This is my AD review of the -25
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Can someone (the shepherd?) confirm that an automated syntax checker
> > > has run over the JSON in examples?
> >
> > I'm the shepherd.  I validated the YANG in Section 4.3, but forgot to do
> the JSON.  I just ran the JSON in Figures 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 23, 24,
> 25, 27, 29, and 31 through https://jsonlint.com/.  All but Figure 16 came
> back fine.
> >
> > Per Figure 16, the following edit is necessary (i.e., add a quote around
> integer, s/integer/"integer"/)
> 
> Hmm, that one is I think supposed to be more schema-like than example-like,
> so I actually was arguing to remove the quotes around "string" [and thus
> make the validator complain even more].
> 
> Thanks for checking!
> 
> -Ben
> 
> > OLD
> >            "target-port-range": [
> >              {
> >                "lower-port": integer,
> >                "upper-port": integer
> >              }
> >            ],
> >            "target-protocol": [
> >              integer
> >            ],
> > NEW
> >            "target-port-range": [
> >              {
> >                "lower-port": "integer",
> >                "upper-port": "integer"
> >              }
> >            ],
> >            "target-protocol": [
> >              "integer"
> >            ],
> >
> > Roman