[netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-23: (with COMMENT)

[Adam Roach <[e-mail]>]

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-23: No Objection

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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model/



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

One quick comment on the model for the console:

            +--rw console! {console-action}?
            |  +--rw facility-filter
            |  |  +--rw facility-list* [facility severity]
            |  |     +--rw facility            union
            |  |     +--rw severity            union
            |  |     +--rw advanced-compare {select-adv-compare}?
            |  |        +--rw compare?   enumeration
            |  |        +--rw action?    enumeration
            |  +--rw pattern-match?     string {select-match}?

Syslog can be (and frequently is) configured to log to "console" on a
non-default tty. It's not clear from this model how this would be configured or
indicated. Is the assumption here that all non-default-console tty logging
would be handled by the "file" portion of the tree? If so, it would be worth
indicating so explicitly, and noting that such an approach is limited to those
systems that present ttys as a part of the filesystem. Alternately, it might
make sense to add a tty field to the "console" subtree to report/configure this
value.