[netmod] Re: WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis

Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> Tue, 01 October 2024 00:00 UTC

Return-Path: <01000192456066a9-d66cb55b-ad71-4af6-8c02-28a6dcca4583-000000@amazonses.watsen.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 D9002C169405; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 17:00:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.905
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.905 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b5Cj_wxKkTQp; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 17:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a8-31.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-31.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.31]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF25AC17A743; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:59:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=ug7nbtf4gccmlpwj322ax3p6ow6yfsug; d=amazonses.com; t=1727740798; h=From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:Feedback-ID; bh=KWxltEfoPjZW2fhCXH4vHsBRArJktg/lOUch28HaCqg=; b=AXF5xS6pc6RWl/nnOMR2AkDhDTsVH2fj9pneYH/5CTcX4NrzcLCWP2lIo6DJA4gb 3SOA/qMRGO812r+iLSy5qqhjw4JQ1n6LVV14ffGjmdBl/We3CoRqQVIinXDXXhWtKSS HW9shFzMe74C/LzzJZWvwXG0jE8vHKq8NVEUFkEU=
From: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
Message-ID: <01000192456066a9-d66cb55b-ad71-4af6-8c02-28a6dcca4583-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CD2B6D75-2915-4452-8E8E-1569B0BC7BA4"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.400.31\))
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 23:59:58 +0000
In-Reply-To: <e607aa67-7c53-419c-aa5f-30c74aae7d96@labn.net>
To: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis@ietf.org
References: <0100018f4e31af70-fd072689-4a32-4547-b32c-ce06781df2b5-000000@email.amazonses.com> <0100019211083dbf-15ebf66a-653f-487c-b15e-15380177c80f-000000@email.amazonses.com> <e607aa67-7c53-419c-aa5f-30c74aae7d96@labn.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.400.31)
Feedback-ID: ::1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
X-SES-Outgoing: 2024.09.30-54.240.8.31
Message-ID-Hash: KCVZUWSNY4HNMA3TG65LKWCMT5DXPAQX
X-Message-ID-Hash: KCVZUWSNY4HNMA3TG65LKWCMT5DXPAQX
X-MailFrom: 01000192456066a9-d66cb55b-ad71-4af6-8c02-28a6dcca4583-000000@amazonses.watsen.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-netmod.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [netmod] Re: WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/HL3SQqtTGsqGFEDDQihmfh-7-UM>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:netmod-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:netmod-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:netmod-leave@ietf.org>

Hi,

I also have a late comment as contributor on this draft (based on a co-chair discussion).  

Looking at the diff relative of Section 3.4, there is mention of folding (search “unfold”).  Is this intended to point to RFC 8792 and, if so, should that be clarified? 

I’m aware that the folding of tree diagrams was discussed on the list recently, but please be aware that the “--tree-line-length=69” parameter to the `pyang` utility is not always able to make the diagram fit into 69-columns.

Separately, I notice the document mentions twice "--yang-line-length 69”.  I believe that the ‘=‘ character is missing, i.e., it should be "--yang-line-length=69”.

Thanks,
Kent (and Lou)




> On Sep 30, 2024, at 6:23 PM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have a late comment as contributor on this draft (based on a co-chair discussion). 
> 
> Looking at the diff relative of section 3.4 to the original document, I think the idea of referencing a URL versus an appendix is a bad idea. The new text in question:
> 
> " If the complete tree diagram for a module becomes long (more than 2 pages, typically), the diagram SHOULD be split into several smaller diagrams (a.k.a subtrees). For the reader's convenience, a subtree should fit within a page. If the complete tree diagram is too long (more than 5 pages, typically) even with groupings unexpanded (Section 2.2 of [RFC8340]), the authors SHOULD NOT include it in the document. A stable pointer to retrieve the full tree MAY be included."
> 
> I prefer the original in https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8340#section-3.3 which 
> 
> (a) does not have conformance language and 
> 
> (b) keeps the information as available as the document itself by including the long diagram in an appendix.
> 
> I would like to see this section reverted to the original.
> 
> Authors,
> 
> What is the motivation for the change to URLs and making this a "SHOULD NOT"?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou
> ¶ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-17#section-3.4-1>
> 
> On 9/20/2024 4:03 PM, Kent Watsen wrote:
> 
>> This WGLC has successfully closed.  The document has moved to the WG State "WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up”.
>> 
>> Thank you everyone, especially Med, for your diligence in resolving issues!
>> 
>> The next step is the Shepherd write-up.  Would anyone in the WG be willing to volunteer to help out with it?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kent and Lou (chairs)
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 6, 2024, at 9:57 AM, Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> <mailto:kent+ietf@watsen.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> This email begins a two-week WGLC on:
>>> 
>>> 	Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG Data Models
>>> 	https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis/
>>> 
>>> Please take time to review this draft and post comments by May 20.  
>>> Favorable comments are especially welcomed.  
>>> 
>>> No IPR has been declared for this document:
>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/1LDpkPi_C8cqktc7HXSZgyPDCBE/
>>> 
>>> Kent & Lou (as co-chairs)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> netmod mailing list
>>> netmod@ietf.org <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list -- netmod@ietf.org <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
>> To unsubscribe send an email to netmod-leave@ietf.org <mailto:netmod-leave@ietf.org>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list -- netmod@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to netmod-leave@ietf.org