Re: [netconf] WG LC for three drafts or two of them

Hi Tom,

> On Jun 13, 2020, at 7:29 AM, tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> wrote:
> 
> I have concerns about trust-anchors and crypto-types.  They are both more or less non-existent when it comes to text.  I do not want to have to reverse engineer the YANG or XML to find out what RPC or action there are, what types of cipher suites and such like are supported - and perhaps those that are not such as raw keys.  I would expect there to be five or ten pages of such in each.

This is an interesting comment.   How do other folks feel about this?

Generally, perhaps to a fault, I try to let the YANG modules do the talking.  Not only is the YANG syntax more exact, but it eliminates potentially-inconsistent duplicate text and, of course, the effort to create the duplicate text.  

That said, now that we’re near/at the end, creating some duplicate text may now be reasonable.  FWIW, there is no limitation on cipher-suites but, perhaps to your point, some introduction text could say that.  

A reasonable compromise might be to mimic what I did in Section 2 of draft-kwatsen-netconf-sztp-csr, whereby it has my normal (overview/diagrams + examples + yang module) subsections, but there’s more text surrounding the diagrams and examples making those sections more readable...

It’s funny that you say you don’t want to reverse-engineer the YANG, as many times I feel the opposite, not wanting to have to read the RFC, when the YANG module should be self standing.  I’m not minimizing your critique, just finding humor in the irony.  ;)

>  Look for example at layer0-types or layer1-types for modules with what I would regard as adequate text.

I recently answered this question for Mahesh here: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/UDNkN5SOmeDaHA5pHYhe-v0l6MI/ <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/UDNkN5SOmeDaHA5pHYhe-v0l6MI/>

Kent // contributor

> Tom Petch
> 
> From: netconf <netconf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Eric Voit (evoit) <evoit=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> Sent: 12 June 2020 21:03
> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
> 
>>> From: netconf <netconf-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Mahesh
> 
>>> Jethanandani
> 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 7:48 PM
> 
>>> To: Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
> 
>>> Subject: [netconf] WG LC for three drafts
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> NETCONF WG,
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> The authors of
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> - draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types
> 
>>> - draft-ietf-netconf-keystore
> 
>>> - draft-ietf-netconf-trust-anchors
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> have indicated that these drafts are ready for Last Call (LC).
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> This kicks of a 2 week WG LC for the three drafts. Please review and
> 
>>> send
> 
>> any
> 
>>> comments to the WG mailing list or by responding to this e-mail.
> 
>>> Comments can be statements such as, I read/reviewed the document and
> 
>>> believe it is ready for publication, or I have concerns about the
> 
>>> document. For the
> 
>> latter,
> 
>>> please indicate what your concerns are.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> Any reports on implementation status or plans to implement are also
> 
>>> very useful.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> Thanks.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> Mahesh Jethanandani (as co-chair)
> 
>>> mjethanandani@gmail.com
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> _______________________________________________
> 
>>> netconf mailing list
> 
>>> netconf@ietf.org
> 
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf