Re: [netmod] [core] 🔔 admin WG Last Call of CORECONF drafts: draft-ietf-core-yang-yang-library-01

Hello Tom,

Thank you for your review and your comments! They were indeed very helpful.
I will try to spend some more time making sure we follow the
recommendations from RFC8407, but for now please find my answers below
(prefixed with [IP]). Note that the diff after handing your comments can be
found at [1] for the txt file diff and [2] for the raw Markdown diff.

Best regards,
Ivaylo

[1]:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-core-yang-library&url2=http://core-wg.github.io/yang-cbor/draft-ietf-core-yang-library-latest.txt
[2]:
https://github.com/core-wg/yang-cbor/commit/2aa29f2468c827fd4b58cad6a5decba795d9c767

On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 12:11 PM tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> wrote:

> There is quite a lot wrong with the admin of the YANG-library I-D when
> compared with RFC8407 IMHO
>
> Security considerations does not conform to boiler plate
>

[IP]: Adding the following text in the beginning of the security
considerations will make it follow the same structure as RFC7895. Would
that be acceptable for you?

The YANG module defined in this memo is designed to be accessed via CORECONF
{{-comi}}, NETCONF {{RFC6241}} or RESTCONF {{RFC8040}}. Depending on the
used
protocol, the security considerations of some or all of those will apply.

> IANA considerations does not register name space
>

[IP]: I added such registration. Please let me know if it looks fine. The
relevant text is:

## YANG Namespace Registration

This document registers the following XML namespace URN in the "IETF XML
Registry", following the format defined in {{RFC3688}}:

URI: please assign urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-constrained-yang-library

Registrant Contact: The IESG.

XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace.

> RFC 6991  is imported and so MUST be a Normative reference
>

[IP]: Fixed

> ietf-sid-file is imported and so MUST be a Normative  not Informative
> reference for the I-D
>

[IP]: Fixed

reference ietf-core-sid would be better as RFC YYYY with an RFC Editor note
> asking them to replace YYYY with the number assigned to 'YANG Schema ...
>

[IP]: Fixed

> Organization Netconf WG seems an odd choice and contradicts contact details
>

[IP]: Changed to CoRE WG

> Contact does not normally specify WG Chairs
>
>
[IP]: I removed the chairs and left only the group and the editors. Is that
what you had in mind?

more than one revision clause
>

[IP]: Fixed

> CORECONF not an abbreviation I recognise
>

[IP]: We have received other comments related to this. We will discuss them
during the meeting today and try to clarify this.

> I will look some more as and when these are addressed (or I see IETF Last
> Call:-)
>
> Tom Petch
> ________________________________________
> From: netmod <netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Carsten Bormann <
> cabo@tzi.org>
> Sent: 09 March 2020 13:04
> To: core
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: [netmod] 🔔 WG Last Call of CORECONF drafts:
> draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-12, -sid-11, -comi-09, -yang-library-01
>
> It took us a long time to get the four CORECONF drafts in sync,
> but now we are ready for WGLC.
>
> This starts a working group last call for
> — draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-12
> — draft-ietf-core-sid-11
> — draft-ietf-core-comi-09
> — draft-ietf-core-yang-library-01
>
> ending on
>
>         24:00 UTC on Tuesday, March 31, 2020.
>
> (This includes some extra time for the IETF week and for cross-WG
> coordination.)
>
> This WGLC is copied to the netmod WG mailing list; please do have a look
> at these drafts as they are slated to become a part of the greater
> YANG/NETCONF/RESTCONF family.  We intend the discussion to be on the
> CoRE mailing list, but if you find a fundamental issue with YANG or
> RESTCONF, feel free to discuss that on netmod instead.
>
> Please start a new email thread for each major issue that will need
> discussion and make sure the subject line includes the draft name and
> some sort of name for the issue.  (Minor issues such as typos can also
> be sent to the authors.)
>
> If you read the draft and think it looks fine, please send a one line
> email to the list or to the chairs letting us know that so we can get
> a feel of how broad the review has been.
>
> (To reviewers and authors:)  If you are aware of any patent claims that
> might apply to systems that implement these drafts, please review BCP 78
> and BCP 79 and make any appropriate IPR declaration before the last-call
> ends. If you are not sure whether you need to make a declaration or not,
> please talk to the chairs and we will help.
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> _______________________________________________
> core mailing list
> core@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core
>