Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-01

Hi Acee,

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> writes:

> Hi Lou, et al, 
>
> The only issue we are struggling with is whether we need to specify the
> version in the ietf-interfaces import. We have noted that
> draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-01.txt does not import by revision.

I would suggest to import *without* revision but add a description
indicating that the NMDA-compatible revisions are needed.

Importing by revision is clearly suboptimal. Hopefully a new mechanism
such as semantic versioning will be introduced soon to alleviate this
issue.

>
> We also have so nits:
>
>    1. Add an informative reference for
> [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams].
>    2. Based on a comment from Vladimir, we added the prefix for
> ietf-routing.yang, “rt:”, to several references within ietf-routing.yang.
> Was this necessary? Of course, the model compiles with or without the
> prefix.

RFC6087bis has some rules in sec. 4.2, and these should be followed.

Also, the security considerations should IMO be changed, see my recent
message:

https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg19610.html

Of course, the NEW formulation needn't be exactly as I suggested, but
the text "The YANG module [...] is designed to be accessed ..." is
apparently wrong and shouldn't be used any more.

Thanks, Lada

>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> On 12/15/17, 3:55 PM, "netmod on behalf of Lou Berger"
> <netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>
>>All,
>>	This last call is closed.
>>
>>We note that there was an update during the LC and that no comments were
>>received during the LC period.  As this is simply a mechanical update
>>that has been discussed in the WG we plan to proceed with the
>>publication process.
>>
>>Authors,
>>	Please let/us the WG know when you have published a version ready for
>>publication.  Also please let the WG know what has changed in the
>>document since the start of LC (rev -01)
>>
>>Thank you,
>>NetMod Chairs
>>
>>
>>
>>On 11/29/2017 12:26 PM, Lou Berger wrote:
>>> All,
>>> 
>>> This starts a two-week working group last call on
>>> draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-01.
>>> 
>>> Please recall that this update's intention is to
>>> modify the YANG module to be in line with the NMDA
>>> guidelines [1].  Reviewing the diff between the two
>>> drafts [2] should reveal just this.
>>> 
>>> The working group last call ends on December 13.
>>> Please send your comments to the netmod mailing list.
>>> 
>>> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document
>>> and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome!
>>> This is useful and important, even from authors.
>>> 
>>> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dsdt-nmda-guidelines-01
>>> [2] 
>>>https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?difftype=--hwdiff&url1=rfc8022.txt&url2=dr
>>>aft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-01.txt
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Netmod Chairs
>>> 
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>netmod mailing list
>>netmod@ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67