[Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-06

Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Tue, 10 July 2018 11:14 UTC

Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietf.org
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AA1A130F75; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 04:14:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf.all@ietf.org, netconf@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <153122128332.25153.10473559847025784058@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 04:14:43 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/1RPcvsI08-R4tkQV4NTLmDur-rM>
Subject: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-06
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 11:14:44 -0000

Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost Ready

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-06
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 2018-07-10
IETF LC End Date: 2018-07-09
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: The document is well written, and almost ready for publication.
However, I have one comment that I would like the authors to address.

Major issues: None

Minor issues:

Sometimes, when a draft updates an existing RFC, people ask whether
implementations not implementing the draft are still compliant with the updated
RFC. Based on discussions, the consensus seems to be that existing
implementations are still compliant, and if one wants to mandate the new
features a bis is needed. I would just like to confirm whether that applies
also to this draft. If so, perhaps a note indicating that would be useful, in
order to avoid discussions in future? Related to that, it would also be good to
have an interoperability statement, saying that implementations that implement
the draft will still work with implementations that do not.

Nits/editorial comments: None