[netmod] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-11

Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Thu, 04 October 2018 02:43 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietf.org
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42577130DDA; Wed, 3 Oct 2018 19:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: netmod@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.85.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <153862099823.8954.12813773940704626148@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 19:43:18 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/QsdY66VSQkf_SgmKBPreWsPyk54>
Subject: [netmod] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-11
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 04 Oct 2018 02:43:19 -0000

Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review result: Ready with Issues

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at


Document: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-??
Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review Date: 2018-10-03
IETF LC End Date: 2018-06-29
IESG Telechat date: 2018-10-11

Summary: This document seems to meet the specific requirements for publication
as a proposed standard.

Major issues:
    It is still this reviewer's opinion that for a reader who has not been
    involved in the discussion in the working group, the document is quite
    unclear and confusing.   For somewhat more details, please see my previous
    review at

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments: