[Gen-art] Re: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-17 ietf last call Genart review

[Scott Mansfield <[e-mail]>]

Hello, and thank you for the review!

Please see my responses and suggested actions marked by <scott></scott> in-line below.  Let me know if the resolutions are acceptable, and I will re-spin the draft.

Regards and Thanks,
-scott.

Snip...

Minor issues:

Section 9 (Security Considerations) has RFC AAAA, but I don't see where that reference is defined. Please double-check that this reference is clear.
<scott>
This is from the Security Considerations template found in draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis.  I suggest that I simply take out the first sentence of that section since draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis isn't an RFC yet.  Leave the rest of the section because the new template is easy to read and use.
</scott>

Nits/editorial comments:

Are Sections 2 and 3 the high level descriptions and Sections 4 and 5 the formal specifications? The headings are not clear about this, as the difference between them is "Module" VS "YANG module". Please consider changing the headings to make the structure of the document clearer.
<scott>
I see your point.  Section 2 is the introduction and rationale for section 4 and Section 3 is the introduction and rationale for section 5.  So I suggest the following...

Change the section titles to:
2. Interface Extensions YANG module introduction and YANG tree
3. Interface Ethernet-Like YANG module introduction and YANG tree
And leave section 4 and 5 titles the same.
</scott>

In Section 9, if there are no particularly sensitive nodes, does this text need to be included at all?

<scott>
The Security Consideration section is written following the template from the draft of RFC8407bis.  See clause 3.7.1 here: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-28.html#section-3.7.1 for why the wording about sensitive nodes is included.
</scott>