[Dots] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis-02

Ebben Aries via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 01 December 2020 23:22 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dots@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1195D3A0B16; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:22:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ebben Aries via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <yang-doctors@ietf.org>
Cc: dots@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.23.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <160686493001.17117.9724616300764054197@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Ebben Aries <ebben.aries@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 15:22:10 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/KM_XcmCq0QS9_bTHB42M-I2mwEw>
Subject: [Dots] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis-02
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 23:22:10 -0000

Reviewer: Ebben Aries
Review result: Ready

2 modules in this draft:
- ietf-dots-signal-channel@2020-09-24.yang
- iana-dots-signal-channel@2020-09-24.yang

YANG compiler errors or warnings (pyang 2.4.0, yanglint 1.9.2)
- No compiler errors or warnings however pyang 2.4.0 is currently the only
  compiler verified to emit YANG sx:structure data in tree format.  Instance
  data could not yet easily be validated given the current linters/compilers.

Links to previous relevant reviews:


Updates/comments since prior review

While there is a -02 version of the draft posted since the YANG Doctor review
request against -01, the updates reflect textual wording of the draft and YANG
module contents have not changed thus this review encompasses the latest -02
version as well.

Since the -00 version, the following previous review comments have now been

- Textual wording in the draft around IPv4/IPv6 prefix lengths
- The prefix for 'ietf-dots-signal-channel' is now updated to a more
  descriptive 'dots-signal'
- Import prefixes are updated to reflect usage of the imported module prefix
- Author email address corrections
- The prefix for 'iana-dots-signal-channel' is now updated to a more
  descriptive 'iana-dots-signal' and thus this module now carries with it a
  revision bump

Updated nodes:

The 'lifetime' node has now been updated from a single 'int32' value to a
union of uint32 and int32 with a range restriction.  From a modeling
standpoint for the uint32 value, while '0' is invalid in a request, it appears
the status retrieval could very well still report '0' for a brief period of
time thus assume this is the reason for not implementing a range restriction
on the uint32 value as well indicating "1..4294967295"?

Now, when this translates into CBOR representation, the wire protocol I will
assume (Sorry just briefly researched this re: CBOR) will differentiate 2
separate types here so we don't run into -1 and 4294967295 both representing
indefinite lifetime?

While I share similar opinions to Jan's review in
review-ietf-dots-telemetry-14-yangdoctors-lc-lindblad-2020-11-26 in relation
to the draft and data structure definitions, I believe from a YANG doctor
review standpoint, we are ready to move forward with this draft/module-set.