[mpls] Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-05

[Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>]

Yingzhen

On 5/28/24 7:05 PM, Yingzhen Qu wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> 
> Thanks for the review and comments. Version -07 has been uploaded to 
> address your comments. Detailed answers below.

Version -07 has resolved my concerns.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> Thanks,
> Yingzhen
> 
> On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 10:51 AM Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
>     I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>     Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>     by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>     like any other last call comments.
> 
>     For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
>     <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq
>     <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>>.
> 
>     Document: draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-05
>     Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
>     Review Date: 2024-05-27
>     IETF LC End Date: 2024-06-04
>     IESG Telechat date: ?
> 
>     Summary:
> 
>     This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
>     review.
> 
>     Disclaimer:
> 
>     This reviewer is "YANG challenged". Hence I have not verified the
>     syntax
>     or semantics of the YANG content. I trust there has been or will be a
>     separate review by a YANG expert.
> 
>     ISSUES: 3
>     NITS: 1
> 
>     1) ISSUE - General
> 
>     I find the language in this document to be extremely difficult to
>     follow. (For instance, see the confusing language cited in the next
>     issue.) The main problem is that it is formally referencing and
>     defining
>     terms/entities named using sequences of words and acronyms including
>     spaces. (This includes YANG entities, IANA registry table names, and
>     the
>     names of entries in IANA registries.)
> 
>     These terms are used in descriptions with nothing to distinguish them
>     from the surrounding text. Hence it becomes a struggle to parse the
>     text. I strongly recommend revising the document to syntactically set
>     off the formal names of the entities being defined and referenced from
>     the surrounding text. For instance: 'IGP MSD-Types'
> 
> [Yingzhen]: Please see the answer to issue #2.
> 
>     2) ISSUE - Confusing language in Section 1
> 
>     I can't parse: "... defines the identities for Maximum SID Depth (MSD)
>     Types as the IANA the IGP MSD-Types registry."
> 
>     I still can't follow it even if I make the change I requested above:
> 
>     "... defines the identities for Maximum SID Depth (MSD) Types as the
>     IANA the 'IGP MSD-Types' registry."
> 
>     . I *think* you might mean:
> 
>     "... defines the identities for 'Maximum SID Depth (MSD)' Types in the
>     IANA 'IGP MSD-Types' registry." But I am far from certain of this.
> 
> [Yingzhen]: The first paragraph of section 2.1 has been written and 
> added information about the IANA registry. Hope it's clear now. If more 
> clarification is needed, please kindly let us know.
> 
>     3) ISSUE - Possible missing IANA action
> 
>     Section 4 defines a YANG module named 'iana-msd-types'. I *think* there
>     is an intent to add this as a new entry in the IANA registry 'IGP
>     MSD-Types'. But I don't find anything that does this. (I would expect
>     something more in IANA Considerations.)
> 
> [Yingzhen]: No, the YANG Model types represent the existing IANA 
> registry without modifying it.
> 
>     4) NIT
> 
>     The document heading shows "Workgroup: Internet" but shouldn't it be
>     the
>     MPLS WG?
> 
> [Yingzhen]: fixed.