[netmod] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-07

Joe Clarke <jclarke@cisco.com> Sat, 06 January 2018 20:30 UTC

Return-Path: <jclarke@cisco.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 9B2A812AF84; Sat, 6 Jan 2018 12:30:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Joe Clarke <jclarke@cisco.com>
To: <ops-dir@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, netmod@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.68.2
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <151527064556.32311.7928092264244016989@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2018 12:30:45 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/uZJGBSI49tCL7UwkpJ5e72Qu4Oo>
Subject: [netmod] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-07
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sat, 06 Jan 2018 20:30:45 -0000

Reviewer: Joe Clarke
Review result: Ready

I am completing this review as a representative of the ops directorate.  This
document describes an NMDA-compliant version of the ietf-routing family of YANG
modules that obsoletes the revisions in RFC8022.  Overall, I feel this document
is ready, with some very minor spelling nits.

The only substantive comment I have is in the comments ahead of the
now-obsolete state branches.  Currently, these comments just state "Obsolete
State Data".  I wonder if it would make sense to add a bit more text here to
reference why these branches are now obsolete.  Perhaps a reference to the NMDA
document would be beneficial.

Spelling-wise, search for Managment.  There are four instances in the YANG
modules themselves.  Obviously, these should be "Management".

Another minor nit I noticed (and this is likely an issue with pyang) is that
when using a grouping, the YANG tree lists nodes like routing-state ->
router-id with a '+' instead of a 'o' (i.e., indicating obsolete).  Not a big
deal since the parent container is obsolete.

One comment I have is that the imports clauses here definitely point out a need
to be able to import by some kind of version that will allow to set a minimum
requirement (e.g., import by semantic version).  Having comments such as are in
the modules now are not machine-consumable, and will likely cause operational
challenges for those that do not pay attention.