Re: [i2rs] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-09

["Susan Hares" <[e-mail]>]

Lixing:

 

You stalled the process by not responding to the IPR statement.  Without it, I will not actively include you in the author list and I will nominate authors.   Why?  Because the IESG will not approve a RIB Yang model without the IPR statements. 

 

If you wish to be included, please send your IPR statement to the WG list.   I will do a secondary call for this in a few moments.  

 

Sue Hares

 

From: Alia Atlas [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 12:46 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Susan Hares; Amit Dass; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-09

 

Lixia,

 

When an internet-draft is submitted, there is an irrevocable and permanent copyright given to the IETF.

Authors also retain their own copyright, of course.

 

The draft has 6 authors; there is always a need to justify that.  The IETF strongly prefers no more than

5 authors.  The fact that you have stalled the process because you did not respond to the IPR query

does not help.

 

WG Chairs may appoint and replace editors and authors of WG drafts.

 

Regards,

Alia

 

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:17 PM, [e-mail] <[e-mail]> wrote:

Hello Susan,
I'm the original author of this draft.
Even now 70% of this draf is written by me, I have 70% copyright of this draft.
So you cann't remove my name.

Best Regards
Lixing Wang

发自我的华为手机



-------- 原始邮件 --------
主题：RE: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-09
发件人：Susan Hares 
收件人：'Amit Dass' ,'Alia Atlas' 
抄送：[e-mail],






Amit:

 

Remove one of the authors.   Please consider removing LIxing Wang.   I have not received an IPR statement from this person.   Please do this today.   I apologize for the delay in responding. 

 

Sue 

 

From: Amit Dass [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 8:23 AM
To: Alia Atlas 
Cc: Susan Hares; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: FW: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-09

 

Hi Alia,

 

Apologies for the delay. Needed to redo all again due to the laptop crashed. Updated the draft with the below comments. Couldn’t upload the same due to max 5 author limit kicking in.

 

Best regards,

Amit

 

From: Alia Atlas [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2018 1:51 AM
To: Amit Dass <[e-mail]>
Cc: Susan Hares <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-09

 

Hi Amit,

 

It has been three weeks.

 

Can you please get the update ASAP?  I need to get it reviewed and into IETF Last Call.

As you know, I am closing I2RS at IETF 101 - which means this draft needs to be on the March 8 telechat.

That means it really should be in IETF Last Call by February 16 - and I am traveling all next week 

and busy.   I REALLY need it ASAP to review.

 

Regards,

Alia

 

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 4:58 AM, Amit Dass <[e-mail]> wrote:

Hi Sue,

I expect to have some free time during this week.  Should be able to send the update by Monday next week.

Best regards,
Amit

-----Original Message-----

From: Susan Hares [mailto: <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 10:55 AM
To: Amit Dass < <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail]>; 'Ebben Aries' < <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail]>;  <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail]
Cc:  <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail];  <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail];  <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-09

Amit:iir

Do you think you and your co-authors can do this within a few days.   I would like to forward the publication request.

Also, please remember to look at the latest Revised datastore draft and yang tree module drafts.

Sue Hares

-----Original Message-----
From: Amit Dass [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 4:53 AM
To: Ebben Aries; [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-09

Thanks Ebben for reviewing the draft. I will update the same based on below comments and feedback.


Best regards,
Amit

-----Original Message-----
From: Ebben Aries [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 9:33 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-09

Reviewer: Ebben Aries
Review result: On the Right Track

1 module in this draft:
- [e-mail]

No YANG validation errors or warnings (from pyang 1.7.3 and yanglint 0.14.59)

0 examples are provided in this draft (section 3.12 of
draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15)

Module [e-mail]:
- yang-version statement missing - should be 1.1
- prefix 'iir' is recommended for this module, would 'rib' suffice better?
- import "ietf-inet-types" should reference RFC 6991 per (not as a comment)
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#section-4.7
- import "ietf-interfaces" should reference RFC 7223 per
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#section-4.7
- import "ietf-yang-types" should reference RFC 6991 per
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#section-4.7
- Since this module imports "ietf-interfaces", a normative references must be
  added per
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#section-3.9
- prefix "if" in the import "ietf-interfaces" can remove quotes to remain
  consistent with other imports
- Remove WG Chairs from contact information per
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#appendix-C
- Module description must contain most recent copyright notice per
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#appendix-C
- Module description should contain note to RFC Ed. and placeholder reference
  to RFC when assigned
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#appendix-C
- Add placeholder reference and note to RFC Ed. for RFC when assigned
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#appendix-C
- Security Considerations should be updated to reflect new template at
  https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines
- Section 1.2 should be replaced with reference to
  draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-02 rather (as-is in other i2rs YANG
  drafts in progress) per
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-15#section-2.5.1
- This module contains '12' features.  While it is understood the purpose of
  these features in the module, take precaution as to complexity for clients
  if they need to understand >= quantity of features per module in use on a
  network-element.
- A few comments exist that are either unecessary or redundant.  Encode the
  comment intent rather in description fields if need be.
- Per NMDA, which datastores are targeted for the module?  Will all RPC
  operations be acting upon the dynamic/ephemeral datastore?  It is not clear
  to me if the intention is to be persistent or ephemeral

General comments/Nits:
- references to 'def' could be expanded out to 'definition'
- references to 'decap' could be expanded out to 'decapsulation' for
  readability (across definitions and descriptions)
- Follow consistent capitalization of 'RIB' throughout document text.  Mixed
  use of 'Rib' and 'rib' exists (Outside of YANG node lowercase definitions).
- Is it necessary to prefix all nodes under the nexthop container with
  "nexthop-"?
- Section 2.5 - route-add RPC - text mentions it is required that the nh-add
  RPC be called as a pre-requisite however if the nh already exists and the
  nexthop-id is known, this should not be necessary.  In addition, the text
  reads 'or return' which should rather be a result of querying the
  appropriate node in the data tree.
- In 'IANA Considerations' - s/This document requests to register/This
  document registers/