Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC: draft-ietf-opsawg-model-automation-framework-03

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I've read through the draft and it seems almost ready to progress as an Informational document. I just found one tricky issue in the Security Considerations:

>    The lowest RESTCONF layer
>    is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS
>    [RFC8446].

Do you intend to specify TLS 1.3 as mandatory to implement? RFC8040 specifies TLS 1.2, and this Informational document can't change that.

Editorial:

There seem to be a lot of very long, complicated sentences that are difficult to understand. For example, in the Abstract:

>    Data models for service and network management provides a
>    programmatic approach for representing services or networks and
>    deriving (1) configuration information that will be communicated to
>    network and service components that are used to build and deliver the
>    service and (2) state information that will be monitored and tracked.
and in the Introduction:

>    SDN techniques [RFC7149] are meant to automate the
>    overall service delivery procedures and typically rely upon
>    (standard) data models that are used to not only reflect service
>    providers'savoir-faire but also to dynamically instantiate and
>    enforce a set of (service-inferred) policies that best accommodate
>    what has been (contractually) defined (and possibly negotiated) with
>    the customer.

I suggest reviewing all the sentence above ~40 words to consider splitting them into several shorter sentences.

Also, in the second example, the () () are more confusing than helpful. Throughout the document, I see uses of () that do not help the reader. For example:

> 4.1.2.  Service Creation/Modification
> 
>    A customer is (usually) unaware of the technology...

It is just easier to read like this:

   A customer is usually unaware of the technology...

Regards
   Brian Carpenter