Re: [netconf] [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-sztp-csr-02

[Sean Turner <[e-mail]>]

> On Jun 15, 2021, at 16:06, Kent Watsen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> [Sean, please note the question to you below]
> 
>> On Jun 8, 2021, at 2:16 PM, Joe Clarke via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> ===
>> 
>> Under leaf cmc's description:
>> 
>> s/is the TaggedCertificationRequest and it a bodyPartId/is the
>> TaggedCertificationRequest and it consists of a bodyPartId/
>> 
>> There are two instances of this, and I wasn't sure exactly what you wanted to
>> say here.  This was my attempt to make it readable.
> 
> Reading the description statement for "leaf cmc” shows that it describes three structures, each for a different condition.
> 
> I agree that the text for the last two structures is highly similar, though not exactly the same.  Perhaps the text could be simplified.  Sean, what do you think?  (Search for “leaf cmc” here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netconf-sztp-csr-03)

This text explains which of the CMC’s ASN.1 fields need to be present (see RFC 6402 page 12 “PKIData” and the subfields there). I wrote it kind of like a decision tree because there are three options that need to be addressed. The 1st decision drives the later choices. There is some commonality at the 2nd between the 2nd and 3rd choice, but there’s multiple differences in the 1st two choices. Basically, I couldn’t figure out a way to write this without marching from the beginning to the end for each one of the three options.

spt