[i2rs] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-02

[Reshad Rahman <[e-mail]>]

Reviewer: Reshad Rahman
Review result: Ready with Issues

YANG Doctor review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-02 (by
Reshad Rahman)

3 modules defined in this draft:
- [e-mail]
- [e-mail]
- [e-mail]

No YANG validation errors or warnings (from yang and tangling).

0 examples are provided in this draft (section 3.12 of
draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-14)

Module [e-mail]:
- “import ietf-inet-types” should have a reference to RFC6991 (see section 4.7
of rfc6087bis-14) - “import ietf-network-topology”, prefix should match new
prefix name (if it changes) for this module as per YD review comments of
draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo - Remove WG Chairs from contact information
as per Appendix C of rfc6087bis-14 - Description mentions draft-zhuang-i2rs-…,
should say draft-ietf-i2rs-…. Also in description add “Note to RFC Editor” with
text saying something along the lines of “Please replace reference to
draft-ietf-i2rs-… with RFC Number when published”. - In description: Copyright
s/2016/2017/ - Is the bandwidth identity really needed? Why not a uint64 with a
unit of kbps as in draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang? - Get rid of revision
history, i.e. keep only 1 revision (latest) - What is the difference between
identity fabric-type (VXLAN, VLAN) and enum underlay-network-type (VXLAN,
TRILL, VLAM). Are both needed or do they refer to the same thing? Should be
identity and not enum to support new types in the future? -
service-capabilities. Should this be an identity for future extensibility? Need
more in the description, add reference to other documents where appropriate. -
Groupings route-group, port-functions, acl-list not used, still needed or can
these be removed? - If you do keep route-group, it is IPv4 specific right now
so it needs to be modified. - If you do keep acl-group, please take a look at
draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model - device-role and fabric-port-role. Why not use
identity to allow for new roles to be added in the future. - Is it possible
(now or in near-future) for multiple roles to be assumed?  If yes, how will
this be handled? - In grouping fabric-port, tunnel-option is there
unconditionally. Should it be there only when type is layer2Tunnel or
layer3Tunnel? If so add a when statement. Similarly should are only be allowed
for layer3Tunnel? - In grouping fabric-port, looks like only L3 tunnel (GRE) is
supported. What L2 Tunnels will be supported?

Module [e-mail]:
- Remove WG Chairs from contact information as per Appendix C of rfc6087bis-14
- Indentation issue on P17
- fport-attributes is “config false”, how is a GRE tunnel configured?
- Description mentions draft-zhuang-i2rs-…, should say draft-ietf-i2rs-…. Also
in description add “Note to RFC Editor” with text saying something along the
lines of “Please replace reference to draft-ietf-i2rs-… with RFC Number when
published”. - In description: Copyright s/2016/2017/ - gateway-mode, need more
text in the description and/or references to other documents.

[e-mail]:
- In description make it clear that this module is not needed when NMDA is
supported. - Revision history is incorrect since it has “NMDA”. - Same comments
as for ietf-fabric-topology

General comments on draft:
- Since the document is for DC Fabrics, should the YANG modules be renamed from
ietf-fabric-xxx.yang to ietf-dc-fabric-xxx.yang? - The descriptions in all YANG
Modules are very short/terse. - No IANA Considerations, please see section 3.8
of 6087bis-14. - Security Considerations. Follow template @
https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines as per 6087bis-14.
Looks like the first part of the template is missing. - Appendix A has no text,
just the YANG module. There should be some text explaining why the -state
module exists. Take a look at the text in Appendix B of
draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo-14 as an example.

Nits:
- 3.2.1 s/snatch/snip/?
- 3.2.3 s/terminiation/termination/
- 3.2.3 s/etc al/etc/?
- Most descriptions in the YANG Modules start with lower-case, should be
upper-case. - s/Security Consideration/Security Considerations/ - s/fabric
Topology/fabric topology/? Any it should either be both lower-case or both
upper-case.