Re: [netmod] syslog-model-17 shepherd writeup issues -references

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> Wed, 13 September 2017 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <kwatsen@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 340CE13292D; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 10:08:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.02
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.02 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yR15wYeQhXnY; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 10:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM01-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam01on0123.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.34.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 195751252BA; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 10:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=RTSeF5xf/29ilgkyV7G2WkszRQxXSA7tYE6TIXkMv9A=; b=bATcBK5a456PTGbsh+7rFEdDkLye1g/Ea8rNI1AES4us4y5xeNrshWbBlKR6Vx3qKdyNSPH4/Rt/v31Myb6wks5bpPj59WpJEW63rpLGgUF+f2NeUOEYF4nUwI9ZLoUmVoq9Ecoty47aPcu4/9nJYWHPvV/nDfin1QvRGnKfMUo=
Received: from BLUPR05MB275.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.22.149) by BLUPR05MB1906.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.215.156) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.77.5; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 17:08:28 +0000
Received: from BLUPR05MB275.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.22.149]) by BLUPR05MB275.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.22.149]) with mapi id 15.20.0035.010; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 17:08:27 +0000
From: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
To: t.petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] syslog-model-17 shepherd writeup issues -references
Thread-Index: AQHTLHc0HPi1rZXCNUadzeG98awlR6KyydeA
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 17:08:27 +0000
Message-ID: <8CF097E4-CEB7-4C4E-AC7D-F7F896CD1BB7@juniper.net>
References: <49B4BE2F-6912-49BE-9E4A-830146309AB2@juniper.net> <019b01d32c76$fa7dfc40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
In-Reply-To: <019b01d32c76$fa7dfc40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.20.0.170309
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=kwatsen@juniper.net;
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR05MB1906; 6:Gku8RojjYQUV/FtP8mHRF75zU/pp4S1aSiRlrAwAIinuQaQw0Q6RrpjZxi/yUegsn9yLiOijLX0jDOtpZDYA+k2N15Du/HkfHWszzfQaK8zutYBqfBXYyGXVunFQaHkwpFfRAesEieiaNwe5hB6TwX02wcxn2ljdMhGZnIiMGnbK90BXMGDHYh4C7phWrS20oCkYL8b/0G8uMwhC03CvI9mr1LArJyRq/33eyhaMH/vImgDPjSqVtw4x6ICxZzbqEZaj84STl/6rFYd2jKLzeQEDRhjdkoyTC8jZSONlQqYXNp1LnUNuBz5rZWc1CDKIY5qvJk+x/ph8p+A9y2cAwQ==; 5:zNPxhJE3n58sweEx2ZNpzrH227uKsQhi/yo4tcg0EseOEj4SvC5KIDRmsdDtQD56/FG6RnrD3bmcCqZnY10OJJgUwO2lg3jXUOCNzKYjFxnHTpnOBNf7alW3FkQ7JS8guVPZcwyuYL/Nc2bZKJPROA==; 24:LX7rLlWyK/J7tyVFODzZZT7r4RCJQcDeUdwbtdEI4U5aoI+AY6lr4D0EBz9NnFKvrRR3anP66ntpz59SN5l5Fhl93hNUGdWYsEcfgvx9gyo=; 7:wqvVG3uQtPlToCH9wScsVfD6mOtJS3K5YzCd2DQ9ai5k8qI/QzSjEswVkq/JMeSzQZxZQS1w77ZDshbbY+UI+2c6t1w6WZeuPNycy/ldAYd1UP4YrAYNETE7CaeuPqYt4FGlcdMD4eObbNc9pIzNfbmoDmzqeQp8D9g3sYCCFhe4Ava3wO7VlX3duJghoWG6r+m8xuYATyKf8kxWMds5aS7U15pxex7jAAEbmj3AqiA=
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 9e4d68f3-2da5-4702-a32f-08d4faca0d4a
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(300000500095)(300135000095)(300000501095)(300135300095)(22001)(300000502095)(300135100095)(2017030254152)(48565401081)(300000503095)(300135400095)(2017052603199)(201703131423075)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(300000504095)(300135200095)(300000505095)(300135600095)(300000506095)(300135500095); SRVR:BLUPR05MB1906;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BLUPR05MB1906:
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(138986009662008);
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BLUPR05MB1906C462BB5A494AD7C3410BA56E0@BLUPR05MB1906.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000700101)(100105000095)(100000701101)(100105300095)(100000702101)(100105100095)(6040450)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(93006095)(93001095)(100000703101)(100105400095)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026)(6041248)(20161123560025)(20161123558100)(20161123564025)(20161123555025)(201703131423075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123562025)(6072148)(201708071742011)(100000704101)(100105200095)(100000705101)(100105500095); SRVR:BLUPR05MB1906; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000800101)(100110000095)(100000801101)(100110300095)(100000802101)(100110100095)(100000803101)(100110400095)(100000804101)(100110200095)(100000805101)(100110500095); SRVR:BLUPR05MB1906;
x-forefront-prvs: 042957ACD7
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(376002)(39860400002)(346002)(189002)(199003)(377454003)(13464003)(8676002)(81156014)(66066001)(6506006)(83716003)(189998001)(8936002)(106356001)(4001350100001)(105586002)(50986999)(7736002)(81166006)(83506001)(54356999)(76176999)(305945005)(33656002)(82746002)(230783001)(478600001)(3280700002)(6436002)(3846002)(6116002)(102836003)(3660700001)(2501003)(2906002)(2900100001)(2950100002)(6306002)(316002)(99286003)(8666007)(14454004)(4326008)(53936002)(6246003)(6512007)(36756003)(25786009)(966005)(6486002)(101416001)(97736004)(575784001)(86362001)(5660300001)(68736007)(77096006)(229853002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1906; H:BLUPR05MB275.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <2BA50B20A506E843A2371F184C30A094@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Sep 2017 17:08:27.8790 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR05MB1906
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/D8eMS3prbg8WHofl2hkrJAKggcw>
Subject: Re: [netmod] syslog-model-17 shepherd writeup issues -references
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 17:08:31 -0000

Hi Tom,

Thanks.  The fix I'm looking for is for the 'pattern-match' leaf
to have a 'reference' statement to Std-1003.1-2008, and for S4.1
to also list Std-1003.1-2008 as a draft-level reference.

I was going to point out the typo "the the" as well, but figured
that the RFC Editor would get it.

K. // shepherd


--

Kent

You flag Std-1003.1-2008 as listed as a normative reference but not used
anywhere in the document.  In the Descriptions, but not in the s.4.1
references, I see

This leaf describes a Posix 1003.2 regular expression ...

twice, which may, or may not, relate to this issue.

Back in July, clyde said
"I will insert a normative reference to POSIX 1003.2 in the next
revision of the draft."

In a similar vein, RFC6991 appears in a reference statement but nowhere
else.

As you point out, RFC6021 is referenced but is obsoleted by RFC6991 so
should not be.

And in a slightly different vein,

   registry [RFC7895]/>.  Following the format in [RFC7950]/>, the the

looks odd for plain text and for the repetition of 'the'..

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent Watsen" <kwatsen@juniper.net>
To: <netmod@ietf.org>
Cc: <draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model@ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 10:50 PM
Subject: [netmod] syslog-model-17 shepherd writeup issues


> Clyde, all,
>
> In reviewing the draft for Shepherd writeup, I found the following
issues that I think need to be addressed before the document can be sent
to Benoit for AD review:
>
>
> 1. Idnits found the following:
>
>   Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 1 comment
(--).
>
>     ** There are 2 instances of too long lines in the document, the
longest one
>          being 3 characters in excess of 72.
>
>     ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6021 (Obsoleted by RFC 6991)
>
>     ** Downref: Normative reference to an Historic RFC: RFC 6587
>
>     == Missing Reference: 'RFC5425' is mentioned on line 359, but not
defined
>          '[RFC5425], [RFC5426], [RFC6587], and [RFC5848]....'
>
>      == Unused Reference: 'RFC7895' is defined on line 1406, but no
explicit
>           reference was found in the text
>           '[RFC7895]  Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "YANG
Module L...'
>
>      == Unused Reference: 'RFC6242' is defined on line 1435, but no
explicit
>           reference was found in the text
>           '[RFC6242]  Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over
Secure Sh...'
>
>
> 2. `rfcstrip` extracted "ietf-syslog.yang",  which is missing
"@yyyy-mm-dd" in its name
>
> 3.  neither `pyang` nor `yanglint` found any errors with
ietf-syslog.yang.    pyang says
>       for vendor-syslog-types-example: statement "identity" must have
a "description"
>       substatement.
>
> 4. testing the examples in the draft against yanglint:
>       - for both examples: Missing element's "namespace". (/config)
>       - just removing the "<config>" element envelop resolves this
error.
>
> 5. the 2nd example uses IP address "2001:db8:a0b:12f0::1", but this
SHOULD be a
>      domain name (e.g., foo.example.com)
>
> 6. in the YANG module, anywhere you have an RFC listed in a
'description' statement,
>      there should be a 'reference' statement for that RFC.
>
> 7. in the tree diagram, the leafrefs no longer indicate what they
point at, they now all
>      just say "leafref".  Did you do this on purpose, or are you using
a different tree
>      output generator from -15?
>
> 8. RFC6536 is listed as a normative reference, but it probably should
be informative.
>
> 9. Std-1003.1-2008 is listed as a normative reference, but it is not
used anywhere in the document.
>
> 10. RFC6242 is listed as an informative reference, but it is not used
anywhere in the document.
>
> 11. the document fails to declare its normative references to
ietf-keystore and ietf-tls-client-server.
>         Note: you manually entered the "[RFC yyyy], and [RFC xxxx]"
references…
>
> 12.  The IANA considerations section seems asymmetric.  Either put
both registry insertions into
>         subsections, or keep them both at the top-level…
>
> 13. reviewing the final document against my original YD review, I have
the following responses.  Let's be sure to close out these items as
well.  Ref: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/10lo41Ud4A3ZN11
s-0gOfCe8NSE
>
> 1. ok
> 2. better
> 3. should be: s/the message/these messages/  [RFC Editor might've
caught this]
> 4. better
> 5. still feel the same way, but no biggee
> 6. better, but from 8174, you should add the part "when, and only
when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here."
> 7. fixed
> 8. fixed
> 9. you did what I asked, but the result still isn't satisfying...
> 10. some improvements made in this area, but my ask wasn't among them
> 11. better
> 12. better, but I think the 4th line should be indented too, right?
> 13. better, but I wish you called S1.3 "Tree Diagram Notation"
> 14. fixed
> 15. fixed
> 16. fixed
> 17. fine
> 18. still a weird line brake here.  try putting the quoted string on
the next line.
> 19. fixed
> 20. fixed
> 21. not fixed (re: yang-security-guidelines)
> 22. fine
>
>
> PS: please also be sure to follow-up with Benoit on his AD review.
>
> Thanks,
> Kent  // shepherd & yang doctor
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>