Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20

"Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwildes@cisco.com> Thu, 01 March 2018 15:29 UTC

Return-Path: <cwildes@cisco.com>
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 6A6A112D943 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 07:29:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -12.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 NsmOITZdu0lt for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 07:29:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42D2912D93E for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 07:29:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=58044; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1519918195; x=1521127795; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=dtXBF3pa3xofPvwe1MWFQNnLJFS2hArqVOIrnC+wS+g=; b=RVGjXHrHofhFlUqJUnYMBJIPCZOB2lGLU8Y1ijDKf+ifP5mQxZ/t74Vw Xt67VAltFuuToBmhzwcKCk9Zc7T6hE2bYXVwoC8dfZD1pWu1KjOjpg1xO rsx3syh6KQIWz+RGu1nYacQUAdXxOum4yOuFDaCUfMxaxDE2eRvRLelgL s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AlAQDVG5ha/4UNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQcBAQEBAYJadmZwKAqDSoojjXGCAoEWhyGNCxSBfgMKGAEJhD9PAhqCRCE?= =?us-ascii?q?0GAECAQEBAQEBAmsohSMBAQEEAQEhSwsQAgEIDgMBAgECIQEGAwICAh8GCxQDB?= =?us-ascii?q?ggCBAENBRuEHEwDFRCqcIInJocDDYEwghYBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?dhSaCJ4FXgWYpgwSCakQBAQIZgR5YFgiCTzCCMgWIHosfhmswCQKGUIZugzqBZ?= =?us-ascii?q?06DZ4haiXs5hnICERkBgS0BHjiBUnAVGSEqAYIYCYIBORyBe3cBAYtugRcBAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.47,408,1515456000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="77399033"
Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Mar 2018 15:29:54 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-010.cisco.com (xch-aln-010.cisco.com [173.36.7.20]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w21FTsnY018213 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 1 Mar 2018 15:29:54 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com (173.36.7.25) by XCH-ALN-010.cisco.com (173.36.7.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:29:53 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com ([173.36.7.25]) by XCH-ALN-015.cisco.com ([173.36.7.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:29:53 -0600
From: "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwildes@cisco.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
CC: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>, Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>, "Ron Bonica" <rbonica@juniper.net>, NETMOD Working Group <netmod@ietf.org>, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20
Thread-Index: AQHTpZZfUtsO+32u9kKn7+BDeXhjPqOklbWAgAj1UFmAAGiiAIAB2Z6AgALLlwCAACJuAIAH3TWAgAFlM4A=
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 15:29:53 +0000
Message-ID: <172E0EAF-7A1B-41AD-955A-C6137B774864@cisco.com>
References: <d4a73a00-dce2-2f11-29d0-0eb34920fd3f@cisco.com> <922E608D-951A-459A-B515-B53834C805C1@juniper.net> <022001d3aa6a$c31895e0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <A8296BCA-A33F-44EB-AB94-706A7D4B5BE7@juniper.net> <E859CBB0-CCA7-4E38-909C-9639E9BCB01B@cisco.com> <D6E3E5DA-85D3-429B-8DA4-ADC5BD0E0C38@juniper.net> <F5A84131-6D5E-40D6-B981-9DF4B6314A19@gmail.com> <C062DDC9-8968-4B24-8289-6B2625D3193C@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <C062DDC9-8968-4B24-8289-6B2625D3193C@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.154.131.16]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_172E0EAF7A1B41AD955AC6137B774864ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/Ks7ZUnJkykb-dFf4_PX3hTnTJ2c>
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20
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: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:29:58 -0000

Kent,

I published a new draft that fixes the last two points.

Thanks,

Clyde

From: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
Date: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 10:11 AM
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Cc: Clyde Wildes <cwildes@cisco.com>om>, "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>om>, Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>om>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>et>, NETMOD Working Group <netmod@ietf.org>rg>, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20

[+benoit]

Mahesh,

That's fine, if we want to put the RFC Editor note into the Introduction, I see that you did the same in the ACL draft.  But there still remains the use of IP addresses (not hostnames) in examples and, if we're fixing that, let's please also fix the typo in the title of Section 1.4.

Clyde, can you please post a v23 that fixes these last two points?

Thanks,
Kent  // shepherd


On 2/23/18, 1:05 PM, "Mahesh Jethanandani" <mjethanandani@gmail.com<mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>> wrote:

Kent,



On Feb 23, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net<mailto:kwatsen@juniper.net>> wrote:

Hi Clyde,

Looking at your diff, I see that you aligned the Usage Example text and artwork by making the artwork use the IP address from the text, but you should've instead used the hostname in both locations.  Please see section 3.6 here: https://www.ietf.org/standards/ids/checklist<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_standards_ids_checklist&d=DwMFAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=N9LJpCJBafHdUNdSOe63fe4yTYxK-wmVz_DgH1cnKjM&s=JrRJ2H8Pa9954dNFWzFQ0xW4hCYHxwnrMtFTBVZyvZI&e=>hCYHxwnrMtFTBVZyvZI&e=>.

Also, I see that you moved the Editorial Note to Section 1.4 (along with a typo in the title, ooops).  This is fine, I guess, though I was thinking instead about something like a top-level "RFC Editor Considerations" near the end [hmmm, a budding BCP? ;)].  Actually, I wish you had explained that the text was not in the Abstract, but in a "<note>" element, and it was just a rendering issue.  It's actually common to use the <note> element for this purpose (sorry for not recognizing it before). Please also either fix the typo or, better, move the section back to the <note> element.

I had recommended the move of the note from abstract section to the end of the Introduction section. Abstracts cannot have cross-references in them, which the note had. And that was one of the OPS-DIR comments too.




Kent // shepherd


===== original message =====

Kent, Tom, Yaron, and Ron,

A new version of the draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model has been published that addresses your concerns.

Thanks,



Clyde



On 2/20/18, 9:06 AM, "netmod on behalf of Kent Watsen" <netmod-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of kwatsen@juniper.net<mailto:kwatsen@juniper.net>> wrote:











Kent







You illustrate beautifully the problem I would like a solution to.







The current thinking AFAICT is that tree-diagrams



should be an Informative Reference.







Therefore, the RFC Editor will not hold publication until an RFC number



is assigned.







Therefore, a note asking the I-D reference to be updated to reflect the



assigned RFC number is null - the RFC can be published with the



reference as an i-d and not as an RFC which is what I expect the RFC



Editor to do.







QED





   Except I know that this draft will be stuck in MISREF state and tree-diagrams

   will in fact be assigned an RFC number by the time this draft is published.



   K.







Note that this is not the case of a Normative i-d reference being buried



in the YANG module and not being.noticed by the RFC Editor; that problem



I am content with.











Tom Petch























Please also address these issues when posting -21 to address Benoit's

   issues.  Please post -21 ASAP as Benoit has already placed this draft on

   the IESG telechat in a couple weeks.







Thanks,



Kent // shepherd











On 2/14/18, 8:18 AM, "netmod on behalf of Benoit Claise"

   <netmod-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org><mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of

   bclaise@cisco.com<mailto:bclaise@cisco.com><mailto:bclaise@cisco.com>> wrote:







Dear all,







- the draft is NMDA compliant, right? It should be mentioned.



Ex: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-03, in the abstract and intro







  The YANG model in this document conforms to the Network Management







  Datastore Architecture defined in

   I-D.ietf-netmod-revised-datastores.











- As mentioned in the writeup, [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams]

   should be an informative reference, not normative.







- Editorial:



OLD:



This draft addresses the common leafs



NEW:



This document addresses the common leafs







Please publish a new version asap.



In the mean time, I'm sending this draft to IETF LC.







Regards, Benoit

















   ------------------------------------------------------------------------

   --------







_______________________________________________



netmod mailing list



netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>



https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=cJ7MVnQVc1hgxpVF7oYiVn6Rbm-Qf2dDyrfYhL-s9io&s=u0Hn9GkO-B0jUGm1MnIQ4x4AgIZNXHBIaZhTPmt3dC8&e=











   _______________________________________________

   netmod mailing list

   netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>

   https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwIGaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=vELsmeOQEHNm4fcyJJKG7EpwwzMBGc-MHvHhSPWRzro&s=jSGwP16XlM6ntMKUF3bkCAwRfRtRwATdly2BlUtx2RA&e=







_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMFAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=N9LJpCJBafHdUNdSOe63fe4yTYxK-wmVz_DgH1cnKjM&s=UjOEtJcF00aJzZs5hrqaIqWHebO11ugEeMcESrcmX30&e=>

Mahesh Jethanandani
mjethanandani@gmail.com<mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>