[netmod] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-10

Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Thu, 28 June 2018 19:16 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 112B8130E0D; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 12:16:13 -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: 6.81.3
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <153021337301.18655.5723836004030560167@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 12:16:13 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/dSAUAPnHVspEpemCINshfwdqhzo>
Subject: [netmod] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-10
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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, 28 Jun 2018 19:16:14 -0000

Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review result: Almost Ready

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 treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at


Document: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-10
Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review Date: 2018-06-28
IETF LC End Date: 2018-06-29
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as a Proposed Standards.
    I believe that the working group has gotten too close to the work, and
    failed to notice that important explanations that they understand do not
    actually appear in the document.

Major issues:
     There is no explanation in the document as to who controls mounting and
     how it is specified.  From this, I infer that the intention is that the
     server knows what is to be mounted at specific mount points, and does so. 
      The Client does not tell the server to mount specific schemas in specific
     places.  Ok.  Say so.  And explain that the server knows this by means
     external to the YANG modules.  The text explicitly states that the case
     where the mount point definition selects the data model to be mounted is
     NOT supported by this document.

    There is some ambiguity, quite possibly only in this reader, as to what a
    client finds when it does a NETCONF Get at or below the mount point.  I had
    assumed originally that it would find structure defined by the schema that
    is mounted there, as defined by the schema-mount container.  However, the
    Schema-mount definition itself states that what is found at the mount point
    is an instance of YANG library.   Given that this lefft me completely
    confused, please add some explanatory text?

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
    The introduction, in its third paragraph refers to the "source or target
    YANG module" seeming to use both the term source and the term target to
    refer to the module with the uses or augments statement.  Even if other
    YANG documents use both terms, this is a confusing construction.