Re: [i2rs] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-10: (with COMMENT)

Hi Alissa,

Thanks for your comments!

Please see my responses inline...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper
> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2018 11:10 PM
> To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model@ietf.org; i2rs-chairs@ietf.org;
> shares@ndzh.com
> Subject: [i2rs] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-10:
> (with COMMENT)
> 
> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model-10: No Objection
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email
> addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory
> paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-data-model/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Sec 1.2:
> 
> "YANG tree diagrams provide a concise representation of a YANG module,
>    and SHOULD be included to help readers understand YANG module
>    structure."
> 
> This document does not seem like an appropriate place to have normative
> guidance about this. And if this sentence is removed, I don't see the point of
> including Section 1.2 otherwise. This would also imply deleting the reference to
> I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams.

This results from a YANG doctor review.  I saw it also occurs in other published documents. I personally think it's no harm to keep it, how do you think?

> 
> Sec 2.1: Again here I'm confused about the use of normative language. Why do
> you need to specify normative requirements for what this very document is
> specifying? Or are these supposed to be requirements on implementations?

OK, how about this:

"...a RIB data model needs to specify a way for an external entity to learn about the functional capabilities of a network device." And 

" The RIB data model needs a way to expose the nexthop chaining capability supported by a given network device."

> 
> Sec 2.5: s/causes/caused/

Done

The above updates will be reelected in version-11.

Thanks,
Mach
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> i2rs@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs