Re: [mpls] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang-06

[Tarek Saad <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Tom.

Authors, please look into those comments and update back. 
We will progress the draft once we have those addressed.

Regards,
Tarek

On 10/8/19, 8:00 AM, "tom petch" <[e-mail]> wrote:

    Tarek
    
    Well, yes.  I also commented about
    
    "   [Ed Note: Some of the topics in the above list are to be addressed/
       extended in a later revision of this document]."
    and
    "8.  Open Items
       A list of open items that are to be addressed in future revisions of
       this document follows:
       o  Specify default values for configuration parameters"
    
    both of which I would see as needing fixing before going further.
    Nothing wrong with describing options for future work in an RFC but, as
    written, it reads to me as if this I-D needs further work.
    
    And I was hoping for a version where the line length was fixed, making
    it easier to read, before submitting other comments.  I did note
    
    s.1.1
    / alongwith  /along with /
    
    s.3
                         +-- rw some_ldp_container
    I do not understand this
    
    /ipv4/IPv4/
    
    s.4.2
    /mldp/mLDP/
    
    I suggest expand on first use VRF FRR AF
    
    s.5.3.1
    /address-familty /address-family /
    (or  just AF)
    
    
    RFC XXXX
    stands for both
    "Base YANG Data Model for MPLS mLDP"
    and
    "A YANG Data Model for MPLS LDP"
    the first of which does not exist:-)  I suggest using XXXX for this I-D
    and YYYY for MPLS LDP
    
       "         MP capabilities need to be explicitly enabled under
                container capability.";
    I am uncertain which container this refers to - I need  a longer path
    
    Tom Petch
    
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Tarek Saad" <[e-mail]>
    To: <[e-mail]>
    Cc: <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>; "tom petch"
    <[e-mail]>
    Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2019 8:27 PM
    Subject: Re: WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for
    draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang-06
    
    
    This WGLC is now closed.
    Authors,
    
    There are comments that were received from Tom related to line length
    exceptions in the draft. Can those be addressed before we can proceed
    further?
    
    Regards,
    Tarek
    
    From: Tarek Saad <[e-mail]>
    Date: Friday, September 13, 2019 at 4:34 PM
    To: "[e-mail]"
    <[e-mail]>
    Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
    <[e-mail]>
    Subject: WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for
    draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang-06
    
    Working Group,
    
    This email starts WG Last Call, IPR and implementation poll for
    draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang-06. This WGLC ends on 9/27.
    Please review the document and send any comments to the mpls wg mailing
    list ([e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>).
    
    If you’re a co-author/contributor, please explicitly respond to this
    email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant
    undisclosed IPR.
    
    If you're not a co-author/contributor, you need to respond only if you
    are aware of any relevant IPR not yet disclosed in conformance with IETF
    rules.
    
    Currently there are no disclosed IPRs that can be found here:
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?draft=draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang
    &submit=draft&rfc=&doctitle=&group=&holder=&iprtitle=&patent=
    
    We are also polling for any existing implementation.
    
    Regards,
    Tarek (for the MPLS WG Chairs)