Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-07

["Zhuangyan (Yan)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Paul,

Thank you very much for the reply. We will fix those nits in next version.
Some replies below.

Best Regards,

Yan

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2018 11:27 PM
To: Zhuangyan (Yan) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: General Area Review Team <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-07

On 4/1/18 11:09 PM, Zhuangyan (Yan) wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> 
> Thank you very much for your review and comments.
> Some responses below.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Yan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2018 1:20 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: General Area Review Team <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Gen-ART Telechat review of 
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-07
> 
> 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 wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-07
> Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
> Review Date: 2018-03-31
> IETF LC End Date: 2018-04-03
> IESG Telechat date: 2018-04-05
> 
> Summary:
> 
> This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be fixed before publication.
> 
> Disclaimer:
> 
> I conducted this review without any knowledge of YANG modeling. So the sort of review I can do is superficial.
> 
> Issues:
> 
> Major: 0
> Minor: 0
> Nits:  4
> 
> (1) NIT:
> 
> In my opinion many of the normative references aren't actually 
> normative, and can/should be changed to informative references. In 
> particular the following all seem likely candidates: RFC5246 (TLS),
> RFC6241 and RFC6242 (NETCONF), RFC8040 (RESTCONF), RFC8342 (NMDA), RFC8346. There may be others.
> [Yan] For RFC5246 (TLS), RFC6241, RFC6242 (NETCONF), RFC8040 (RESTCONF) and RFC8342 (NMDA), they are building blocks for YANG module usage and definition, hence referenced as normative.

I get your point, but as best I can tell there is no normative dependency on any of them. They are all *possible* substrates for using this work, but none of them are required.

But it is your call.
[Yan] Thank you : ) we will follow relative RFCs to keep aligned.

> (3) NIT:
> 
> IdNits reports 3 errors and 7 warnings, regarding long lines, references that are missing, unused, obsolete, and a downref. Please fix the errors and review the warnings.
> [Yan] I checked v-07 with idnits 2.15.01, there is no errors/warnings or nits found...can you direct me to the tool you use?

I'm sorry. I actually reviewed -08, even though my message said I reviewed -07. I looked at the HTMLized version:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-08

and then cliced [Nits] at the top:

https://tools.ietf.org/idnits?url=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-08.txt
[Yan] thanks a lot. We'll fix them in next version.

	Thanks,
	Paul