Re: [netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-02

[Robert Wilton <[e-mail]>]

I support adoption of this draft.

I have reviewed draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-02, and ask that the 
following comments be considered after the document has been adopted:

1. Does the draft still require a normative reference to 6020? Given 
that the modules are all YANG revision 1.1 perhaps this isn't required 
any more?

2. In appendix D:
i) it would be better if the YANG library example was updated to match 
the model in YANG library bis (e.g. use a modules path rather than 
modules-state).
ii) I think that it should state that this is an example of the data 
that may be received by reading from the operational state datastore.
iii) In the example, the "interface-state" tree output should be merged 
in with "interfaces" so illustrate the combined NMDA view.

3. ipv6 prefix list.
When I had first looked at combining the existing RFC YANG modules to 
NMDA, I came up with a slightly different way of modelling IPv6 
prefixes, splitting "no-advertise-prefix-list" separately from the 
"advertised prefixes".

E.g. if your draft the tree output is:

       +--rw prefix-list
          +--rw prefix* [prefix-spec]
             +--rw prefix-spec           inet:ipv6-prefix
             +--rw (control-adv-prefixes)?
                +--:(no-advertise)
                |  +--rw no-advertise?         empty
                +--:(advertise)
                   +--rw valid-lifetime?       uint32
                   +--rw on-link-flag?         boolean
                   +--rw preferred-lifetime?   uint32
                   +--rw autonomous-flag?      boolean

Perhaps you could consider this structure instead (I can send you the 
actual YANG if it helps):

        +--rw no-advertise-prefix-list
        |  +--rw prefix* [prefix-spec]
        |     +--rw prefix-spec     inet:ipv6-prefix
        |     +--rw (control-adv-prefixes)?
        |        +--:(no-advertise)
        |           +--rw no-advertise?   empty
        +--rw prefix-list
           +--rw prefix* [prefix-spec]
              +--rw prefix-spec           inet:ipv6-prefix
              +--ro valid-lifetime?       uint32
              +--ro on-link-flag?         boolean
              +--ro preferred-lifetime?   uint32
              +--ro autonomous-flag?      boolean

Thanks,
Rob


On 18/09/2017 14:55, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> As a co-author,
>
> No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> On 9/18/17, 9:48 AM, "Lou Berger" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Authors, Contributors, WG,
>>
>> As part of the preparation for WG Last Call:
>>
>> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to drafts identified above?
>>
>> Please state either:
>>
>> "No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft"
>> or
>> "Yes, I'm aware of IPR that applies to this draft"
>>
>> If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
>> (see RFCs 3669, 5378 and 8179 for more details)?
>>
>> If yes to the above, please state either:
>>
>> "Yes, the IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules"
>> or
>> "No, the IPR has not been disclosed"
>>
>> If you answer no, please provide any additional details you think
>> appropriate.
>>
>> If you are listed as a document author or contributor please answer the
>> above by responding to this email regardless of whether or not you are
>> aware of any relevant IPR. This document will not advance to the next
>> stage until a response has been received from each author and listed
>> contributor. NOTE: THIS APPLIES TO ALL OF YOU LISTED IN THIS MESSAGE'S
>> TO LINES.
>>
>> If you are on the WG email list or attend WG meetings but are not listed
>> as an author or contributor, we remind you of your obligations under
>> the IETF IPR rules which encourages you to notify the IETF if you are
>> aware of IPR of others on an IETF contribution, or to refrain from
>> participating in any contribution or discussion related to your
>> undisclosed IPR. For more information, please see the RFCs listed above
>> and
>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/IntellectualProperty.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> NetMod WG Chairs
>>
>> PS Please include all listed in the headers of this message in your
>> response.
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> .
>