[lmap] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-lmap-yang-11: (with COMMENT)

Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Tue, 21 March 2017 08:15 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: lmap@ietf.org
Delivered-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE2FD129680; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 01:15:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind?= <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-lmap-yang@ietf.org, Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>, lmap-chairs@ietf.org, dromasca@gmail.com, lmap@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.47.2
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <149008412875.25070.13347458064665806770.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 01:15:28 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lmap/_M0UO-AEeQ3aQHrNSJIjluzBuDA>
Subject: [lmap] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-lmap-yang-11=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
X-BeenThere: lmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: Large Scale Measurement of Access network Performance <lmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lmap/>
List-Post: <mailto:lmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:15:29 -0000

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lmap-yang-11: 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:


Thanks for the feedback! Still some comments:

- Maybe make RFC7594 a normative reference.

- It could be good to give some further guidance on how connectivity is
established. Something like, in most cases the controller will connect
the MA and the controller should make sure that it reconnects frequently
based on the timeout configuration of the MA. If the MA e.g. is behind a
NAT, the MA must establish the initial connection and try to reconnect
when the timeout expires. Btw. is it enough to open a transport
connection or do you mean by checking connectivity that there also should
be some data transmitted to ensure that the controller is no only
reachable but also active?

- I still think there might be further information needed on
bootstrapping. This draft only says:
"Pre-Configuration Information: This is not modeled explicitly since
bootstrapping information is outside the scope of this data model."