[Lsr] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg-37: (with COMMENT)

Barry Leiba via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 26 September 2019 05:37 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 808A312003F; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:37:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg@ietf.org, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, lsr-chairs@ietf.org, yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com, lsr@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.102.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Message-ID: <156947626551.29034.6816443991581677055.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:37:45 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/wgYxvFOEROOYY6_m081L5yAKvqQ>
Subject: [Lsr] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg-37: (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, 26 Sep 2019 05:37:46 -0000

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg-37: 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 work on this YANG module.  My comments are all editorial, and
there’s no need for a response... please just consider these, as they will help
make the document clearer.

Throughout the document, please hyphenate the following as shown here:
per-topology basis
per-interface basis
per-level configuration
per-level value
level-specific parameter
interface-specific parameter

When you use “like” to mean “such as”, it’s ambiguous: “like” can also
introduce a comparison, so does “fruit, like an apple” mean any fruit (and an
apple is an example), or are you talking specifically about fruit that is in
some way similar to an apple?  It’s better to say “such as”, to avoid the
ambiguity.  All instances of “like” in the document should be changed, *except*
for “encoded as a MAC address like” on page 35 and “would like to thank” in the
Contributors section.

Other, specific comments:

— Section 2.1 —

   The model implements features, thus some of the configuration
   statement becomes optional.

This is an odd sentence that I’m having a hard time understanding.  Do you mean

   This model includes optional features, for which the corresponding
   configuration statements are optional.

   By advertising the feature "admin-control", a device communicates to
   the client that it supports the ability to shutdown a particular IS-
   IS instance.

The verb “shut down” is two words.

— Section 2.2 —

   Some specific parameters can be defined on a per topology basis both
   at global level and at interface level

Apart from adding a hyphen in “per-topology basis”, you need “the” before both
“global” and “interface”.  There are many places throughout the document where
articles (usually “the”, but sometimes “a” or “an”) are missing.  Someone
familiar with the correct use of articles should take a pass through the

— Section 2.3 —
In the last two paragraphs of the section, one uses “should” advertise and the
other uses “SHOULD” advertise.  They should either both be BCP 14 key words, or
both not.

— Section 2.6 —

   The goal of this empty
   container is to allow easy augmentation with additional parameters
   like timers for example.

As I noted above, you should use “such as”, rather than “like”, and you don’t
*also* need “for example”, because “such as” already has that covered.  So,
“...additional parameters, such as timers.”

— Section 2.8 —

   The "candidate-enable" allows to mark an interface to be used as a

You need a subject for the verb after “allows” or “requires”.  It has to allow
<something> to mark an interface, and you can’t omit the <something>.  So what
is it?

If there really is no sensible entity to put there, you can use passive voice,
‘The "candidate-enable" option allows an interface to be marked for use as a

— Section 2.9 —
Throughout the section, “information” is a collective noun; we don’t say

— Section 4 —
The first four notification descriptions start with “raised when”, and the rest
start with “This notification is sent when”.  Please make them consistent, one
way or the other.

— Section 5 —

   Some IS-IS specific routes attributes are added to route objects

I think this is supposed to say, “Some IS-IS-specific route attributes are
added...” (add another hyphen and take the “s” off “routes”).