Re: [i2rs] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements

["Eric Voit (evoit)" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Susan,

We will make all needful changes next week.

Eric

From: Susan Hares [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 3:18 PM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas'; 'Alia Atlas'; Eric Voit (evoit); Alexander Clemm (alex); Alberto Gonzalez Prieto (albertgo)
Subject: Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements

Eric, Alexander, Alberto:

This is a shepherd's review of draft-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements.

Status: 95% ready for Directorate reviews and IESG with 1 minor technical comment, and a few minor editorial changes.

Overall comment: This document is a joy to read with carefully written English, excellent descriptions of the concepts, and a carefully thought out set of requirements.

Minor technical point: [i2rs-pubsub-security] is no longer an individual draft.  If you feel this draft provides significant additions to the I2rs-protocol-security and I2rs-protocol-security-environment by provide specific concept on [I2rs-pubsub-security], please indicate this in your response.  We will work on adopting and refining this draft.

If you could work on these minor changes this week, we'll try to get the Directorate reviews over the next 2 weeks.

Thank you,

Sue Hares
==============================

Editorial:
#1 p. 2 section 1

You should change period in first bullet to ", and" and the second bullet to ".".
   o  a reliance on RPC-style interactions where data is configured or
      fetched on-demand by applications.

   o  change notifications which identify a node associated with the
      config change, without the actual data updates

#2) p. 3 paragraph 4

   Predating YANG is an

   issue, as monitoring and filtering based on YANG subtrees becomes

   problematic . [RFC6470<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6470>] defines

change /problematic  ./problematic./

#3) p. 4 section 2.1, bottom:

Revise the references to I2RS architecture document to match
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-11

#4) p. 5 update the section 2.1

[i2rs-pubsub-security] is no longer an individual draft.   Once you have determined whether it is needed, update this section.

#5) section 2.3, p. 6 first paragraph

s/We need a technology/We need a new pub-sub technology/

#6) section 4.1,1 paragraph, 2 sentence

s/However, In/However, in/

#7) section 4.1.2, p. 9, 3 paragraph.

This is a single sentence

   s/A Subscription may include filters as defined within a Subscription
   Request,  the Subscription Service must publish only data nodes that
   meet the filter criteria./
   /A Subscription may include filters as defined within a Subscription
   Request. Therefore,  the Subscription Service must publish only data nodes that
   meet the filter criteria within a subscription./


#8 section 4.2.3 , p. 10, paragraph 1

  Sentence:  The updates for each object needs to include an indication whether it
   was removed, added, or changed.

s/needs/need/ - the updates is plural noun to my reading.  However, this grammar can be argued another way.

#9 - section 4.2.5, p. 12, 3rd paragraph

   A loss of authenticated access to subtree or node SHOULD be
   communicated to the Subscriber

s/Subscriber/Subscriber./

#10 - section 4.2.6, p. 12

   A Subscription Service should be able to negotiate the following
   Subscription QoS parameters with a Subscriber: Dampening,
   Reliability, Deadline, Bundling.

s/Bundling/ and Bundling./

#11 - section 4.2.8, p. 8

Lists elements should be terminated with ";" .