[netconf] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-17
Wesley Eddy via Datatracker <email@example.com> Tue, 02 April 2019 16:32 UTC
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C02DF120166; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 09:32:05 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
From: Wesley Eddy via Datatracker <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Reply-To: Wesley Eddy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 09:32:05 -0700
Subject: [netconf] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-17
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 16:32:06 -0000
Reviewer: Wesley Eddy Review result: Ready with Issues This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF discussion list for information. When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC email@example.com if you reply to or forward this review. I reviewed this in conjunction with the set of related WG documents on NETCONF/RESTCONF subscriptions and event notifications. I also have some comments on other documents in the set, some of which may influence this once, since they are closely related. In figure 3, and text on page 11, there is an example with a DiffServ codepoint value of "10". This could be interpreted as binary, decimal, hexadecimal, etc. It should be clear what the base is supposed to be. It seemed pretty ambiguous in this and the related documents, so it's not apparent that an implementer would be sure to get it right or for it to be compatible. I have other broad comments on the DSCP usage that will be in review comments for the subscribed-notifications draft where it is more appropriate.
- [netconf] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-n… Wesley Eddy via Datatracker
- Re: [netconf] Tsvart last call review of draft-ie… Eric Voit (evoit)