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

[Alissa Cooper <[e-mail]>]

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.

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?

Sec 2.5: s/causes/caused/