IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> Wed, 14 February 2018 18:03 UTC

Return-Path: <kwatsen@juniper.net>
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 F3B2512D810 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:03:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 wIIQpW0XEgUy for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:03:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9C9912D811 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:03:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108160.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w1EHx8Af020191; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:03:51 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=dcvOrcHBWBDkUAoA9NNccvrFjVfXbsh/iGyN1PYwcgs=; b=p3J3OxRnU2CUcoo2AXEtuuXlUGuDmZ9ga4XkKcNBNhDByrE8zKehszvOWC9d4ZEd5iq4 RDI3G8TD77IdRGyzxqItzOnGt3Y+rxON/OtpaGqlA7cpTx6iLrh6DCbVT0VBpA5T/1nG enURfu81HFXPez1bbE76LjLkxj23YVZS60GMAoUCSBHDztZA7USf+qBJe9y7vbffLRpa ECbu0n/sCvUSf2dAmfFo3MELwdpoqLU0gmAK9kzk8F4qa8VHwSUyTd+iRr98XFzIV1tb LJV5DjnmX7rdNZWzH9m9e5MN48sEqoB6yTZ2cB8bN6K31orj6oWkQJgbdxxGNvbtEYxn rg==
Received: from nam03-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam03lp0050.outbound.protection.outlook.com [216.32.180.50]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2g4st500ug-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:03:51 -0800
Received: from DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.240.147) by DM5PR05MB3435.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.240.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.527.6; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:03:43 +0000
Received: from DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7433:3915:f20d:6747]) by DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7433:3915:f20d:6747%13]) with mapi id 15.20.0506.013; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:03:43 +0000
From: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
To: NETMOD Working Group <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20
Thread-Index: AQHTpZZd5Geu+8X2WUq2NsIzPrmhNqOj3UoA
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:03:43 +0000
Message-ID: <922E608D-951A-459A-B515-B53834C805C1@juniper.net>
References: <d4a73a00-dce2-2f11-29d0-0eb34920fd3f@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <d4a73a00-dce2-2f11-29d0-0eb34920fd3f@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.20.0.170309
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.13]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM5PR05MB3435; 7:8Tq0CtNG8yKlVdPnTZ9EvaoGYp14w1AHhNK6nwPc9u2dSoKnWtAa2tcOsrZp0ErTNNI+bBb6QhVu9UzOH8JDEvMwrSeu1vZqEebWaXyUNr/6eRuHjEk+5063j/0H/RlvKufcFfhyyLaVrcZtdenrEpnKEEtuxwhzgAmQlgon0qGPUr+bnIcdE4bbpT02P3qO//STWipRHyUhqbOTCwOc4w4q7Ejf3bC+Ce1r0Jg47RTHuGHUjUXe9k28jzQu3JoZ
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4fb34aff-f41a-4d1f-c3ed-08d573d54937
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(48565401081)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3435;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR05MB3435:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR05MB34357CB331FA8E9A495604B3A5F50@DM5PR05MB3435.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(28532068793085)(95692535739014)(21748063052155);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(93006095)(93001095)(10201501046)(3231101)(944501161)(3002001)(6055026)(6041288)(20161123562045)(20161123564045)(20161123558120)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123560045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3435; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3435;
x-forefront-prvs: 0583A86C08
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(346002)(376002)(39380400002)(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(199004)(189003)(3280700002)(6246003)(76176011)(2950100002)(186003)(6916009)(236005)(105586002)(6512007)(54896002)(8936002)(7736002)(6306002)(53936002)(3846002)(6116002)(33656002)(2906002)(106356001)(478600001)(58126008)(83506002)(5660300001)(82746002)(316002)(99286004)(97736004)(3660700001)(6506007)(86362001)(53546011)(229853002)(36756003)(4326008)(59450400001)(68736007)(2900100001)(8676002)(25786009)(81156014)(6486002)(83716003)(81166006)(26005)(14454004)(6436002)(5250100002)(102836004)(66066001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3435; H:DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: oRsH58ZC/xMttmjXz3VYyruZzEgwGfjhNMaOoKAvid0qQ3hkaxedrjZBprkPpACM7LuO5TFisvGRnDwbshsSng==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_922E608D951A459AB515B53834C805C1junipernet_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4fb34aff-f41a-4d1f-c3ed-08d573d54937
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 14 Feb 2018 18:03:43.6100 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR05MB3435
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-02-14_07:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1802140212
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/u8DQXVeb5xt1qV-FDGvidYuxTu8>
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: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:03:59 -0000

Buggers, I thought we caught that tree-diagrams informative/normative thing before.

Regardless, Clyde, please note that I think I was wrong before from the shepherd write-up regarding idnits having a problem:

"""
  == Unused Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netconf-keystore' is defined on line 1340,
     but no explicit reference was found in the text
     '[I-D.ietf-netconf-keystore] Watsen, K., "YANG Data Model for a "Keys...'

   This is a bug in idnits, whereby a reference that splits two lines is
   not found.
"""

Looking at the XML, it seems that references are not specified correctly.

CURRENT:

        <t>This module imports typedefs from [RFC7223], groupings from
        [I-D.ietf-netconf-keystore], and [I-D.ietf-netconf-tls-client-server], and it references [RFC5424],
        [RFC5425], [RFC5426], and [RFC5848] and [Std-1003.1-2008].</t>

SHOULD BE:

        <t>This module imports typedefs from <xref target="RFC7223"/>, groupings from
        <xref target="I-D.ietf-netconf-keystore"/>, and <xref target="I-D.ietf-netconf-tls-client-server"/>, and it references <xref target="RFC5424"/>,
        <xref target="RFC5425"/>, <xref target="RFC5426"/>, and <xref target="RFC5848"/> and <xref target="Std-1003.1-2008"/>.</t>

Right?

And while you're at it, please update the reference to the tree-diagrams draft (-06 is current).  Also, missing is an RFC Editor note requesting that the I-D reference to be updated to reflect the assigned RFC number.

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> on behalf of 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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email