[netconf] Re: WGLC for restconf-trace-ctx-headers-01

["Jan Lindblad (jlindbla)" <[e-mail]>]

Tom,

Thank you for your feedback! Based on your and Med’s input we have produced a new -02 version of the draft.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-trace-ctx-headers/02/
See comments below [janl].


From: tom petch <[e-mail]>
Date: Thursday, 19 September 2024 at 13:29
To: Per Andersson <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: [netconf] Re: WGLC for restconf-trace-ctx-headers-01
Needs some clarification IMHO.  The detail does not dovetail with the W3C document as well as I would hope for.

The W3C reference uses traceparent, tracestate.  The I-D tacks on underscores - these are then different identifiers in the contexts I know of.  This needs clarification, explanation.

[janl] This is a toolchain rendering accident. Of course we are using the exact same identifiers as W3C. The underscores you saw are Markdown formatting that (incorrectly imo) show up in the txt rendering of the document. They are not present in the other output formats, and should not be there at all.

Thank you for getting our attention to this toolchain issue. We have removed the Markdown formatting around these identifiers to ensure the output is correct and unambiguous for all output formats.

There is a  W3C reference is in paragraph 3 but the terms appear before that.

[janl] Ok. We rearranged and rephrased the middle paragraphs in that section to improve the referential sequence and clarity.

The W3C uses italics, underscores and colour and capitalises the terms in places - the repertoire of the I-D is more limited but capitalise IMHO or at least be consistent about that

[janl] I’m not entirely sure where you find the document being inconsistent, but we have now removed all italicization everywhere and capitalized Trace Context, just like the W3C documents do. Maybe that is a step in the right direction? If this still misses your point, please help us understand what you have in mind.

'We would ,,,' is not the usual IETF style.

[janl] You are right of course. We have changed the wording.

'There are two YANG modules specified in this document'
Where?  What section?
This seems inconsistent with
'   This document has no IANA actions.'

[janl] We have clarified that the modules are specified in the sibling NETCONF document.

'seciton'

[janl] Fixed.


HTH

Tom Petch

[janl] Thank you for your review and helpful comments.

Best Regards,
/jan



________________________________________
From: Per Andersson <[e-mail]>
Sent: 18 September 2024 11:47
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [netconf] Re: WGLC for restconf-trace-ctx-headers-01

Dear WG,

The WGLC is extended for another two weeks.

Please take the time to review this document.


--
Per

_______________________________________________
netconf mailing list -- [e-mail]
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

_______________________________________________
netconf mailing list -- [e-mail]
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]