[mpls] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang-16: Discuss

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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


# Éric Vyncke INT AD comments for draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang-16
CC @evyncke

Thank you for the work put into this document.

Please find below some blocking DISCUSS points (easy to address as it the YANG
code is already there), some non-blocking COMMENT points/nits (replies would be
appreciated even if only for my own education).

I hope that this review helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric

Note: this ballot comments follow the Markdown syntax of
https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/tree/main, i.e., they can be processed by
a tool to create github issues.

## DISCUSS (blocking)

As noted in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-handling-ballot-positions-20220121/,
a DISCUSS ballot is a request to have a discussion on the points below; I
really think that the document would be improved with a change here, but can be
convinced otherwise.

### IPV6 is not in base

In 2026, it is not possible to have IPv6 features in the extended module of a
data model while the IPv4 features are in the base module. See also the 2016
IAB statement: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iab-statement-on-ipv6/


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


## COMMENTS (non-blocking)

### Med's DISCUSS

I support Med's DISCUSS points about the IANA-frozen type in the I-D.

### Abstract

s/This document describes a YANG data model /This document *specifies* a YANG
data model / as it is a PS.

### Section 1

s/This document introduces a YANG data model/This document *specifies* a YANG
data model/

### Section 3.1

Typo in `Opaque specifc Key` and s/ipv4/IPv4/, please run a spell-checker ;-)

### Section 9.2

s/::0/::/ to be consistent with the canonical way to write IPv6 addresses.

### Section 11

Please add an informational reference to the actual URI of the registries,
e.g., https://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/xml-registry.xhtml#ns