[Lsr] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-yang-26: (with COMMENT)

Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 22 August 2019 13:20 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C78D91200F8; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 06:20:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org, Stephane Litkowski <stephane.litkowski@orange.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, lsr-chairs@ietf.org, stephane.litkowski@orange.com, lsr@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.100.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh@kaloom.com>
Message-ID: <156648000780.14797.9094204995843360831.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 06:20:07 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/coWhCqp6vzJ8fQXTKpAH-qQkb-A>
Subject: [Lsr] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-yang-26: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:20:08 -0000

Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ospf-yang-26: 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-ospf-yang/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

* Section 2.7

Why are the neighbor configuration and operational state under different
subtrees here? I thought one of the goals of NMDA was to avoid this.

* Section 2.9

Is there a reason why the clear operation for neighbors is defined using an RPC
operation instead of simply an action under the relevant interface?

* Meta comment

NMDA is misspelt as NDMA in several places throughout the document including
the abstract and the introduction. Suggest a global search and replace.

Editorial
========

* Under ospfv2-lsa-option

s/Baes idenity/Base identity/