Re: [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-pim-yang-12
Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 19 May 2018 21:10 UTC
Return-Path: <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CA2512E042; Sat, 19 May 2018 14:10:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 VUhWgqLL-QP4; Sat, 19 May 2018 14:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22f.google.com (mail-io0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6161312DA07; Sat, 19 May 2018 14:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id r9-v6so10214583iod.6; Sat, 19 May 2018 14:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=S2T0Y8CL8du1G+VKhUsIEHdcNTwlIcOw17ipF7fzOjY=; b=YzzARwgHvXIB1eVxTw4VyJA1NTK+fJSQFHDVhKpvBn9+p3KflxLEgHBd+TJBLKFF+A vlT//0IMfr7uzdBeDFssquDLQm+/8IMv2raIiZZiqtV2CcKGK1whzZDyw7xns8Ud+To3 bemV3knOrgkyf7aIETowfPEjmruiRkOc0kJpvtJa9NZZ6UhESwJAPZ7ff3icQKVTph1k KIMn0iHyotkQOBfOwh76cLp6wAnHjUCBGob8xDoo43epjiwzf4EAhS/IwiIvyvaHGgVY +ZoN91DmpMvwM1hlwRuKZRQt4LyGjNRUDKSuSrMIIv+rYUKXN3VpDmFH2C2ndY7WtHH2 oE5w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=S2T0Y8CL8du1G+VKhUsIEHdcNTwlIcOw17ipF7fzOjY=; b=CUE8hp8B2G7pRrAIOOOpmZY2cAKzSjr2g6N3wiGWXIB/T2N/6qQRFSNSpOhIllP9IP RvbQWKs0I4GoVXPUVinHERjS7WXTEk2rDwNT3ONLECuUHaY5iFm+ODxfhah/VJjLVh0I /oCQhUXZjSn2PNoC14h4w7mHPUrKfQ7KwERRCm+Feuh3jbYjOFixo3uq2kuect3WtY+N 6rdkPQ7rcJwn0RvdUbMwugMRuikqF5zGASP9nBFkxqQzNo6Sc7lGibmu+lF0eRVvBo0h PQy3bmzmjVRBbhKyFREPVhgGfarlMgchtI/a4KQfzRe+mHZfDAXL27xyQBmb4AnD5fyw 0S5g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwdn5+iPY0hhAFegdf+WscfcvrN+RAnas7C8gh8V5LDQUXkblnMx YlB4iR5NwQk723Bu38FH8XMl3dB+18OGTNGkBI8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZpo8Fj/kmIJHNyZ9h8etIrF43SbkykWJPYmuA2XU6SazmHx7yJSb1hSME1vXCwNbK3yVU0QEDNIUWsbPywkXIA=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:1683:: with SMTP id 125-v6mr15830010iow.104.1526764210563; Sat, 19 May 2018 14:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.137.195 with HTTP; Sat, 19 May 2018 14:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <043b01d3e132$36d1a640$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
References: <CAEz6PPQSyOaRbFb8JFP6G+rxAXSdiMVLu9-xUvhU8A9JsKOrng@mail.gmail.com> <043b01d3e132$36d1a640$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2018 17:10:10 -0400
Message-ID: <CAEz6PPS=Ff3uTSJvFPt3xxcnMNn1TNV09LLbcannw9u-NpyD5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "tom p." <daedulus@btconnect.com>
Cc: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, yang-doctors@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pim-yang.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, pim@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006d2ebe056c957e4f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/2OaDZR8oBzLitkqhc8OV9H6LcBk>
Subject: Re: [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-pim-yang-12
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pim/>
List-Post: <mailto:pim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 May 2018 21:10:14 -0000
Hi Tom, Thanks for the reminder. Just posted a new version https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-yang-17 to update the references. Best, - Xufeng On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 5:52 AM, tom p. <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote: > Xufeng > > You might want to update your references at some point; several of the > I-Ds referenced in -16 are now RFC e.g. > > 8340 tree diagram > 8342 NMDA > 8343 Interfaces 7223bis > 8349 Routing Management 8022bis > > Also, you reference RFC5306 from the YANG module but I cannot see it in > the References of the I-D. > > Tom Petch > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Xufeng Liu" <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com> > To: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>; > <yang-doctors@ietf.org>; <draft-ietf-pim-yang.all@ietf.org>; > <ietf@ietf.org>; <pim@ietf.org> > Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 6:30 PM > > > Hi Juergen, > > > > Thanks for looking at the document and providing further valuable > comments. > > We have updated the document with https://tools.ietf.org/ > > html/draft-ietf-pim-yang-16 to address these issues. > > > > Besides these fixes, authors and PIM Working Group have further > considered > > and discussed the type of statistic counters in the model. We have > decided > > to used 64-bit type instead of 32-bit type: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/ti58tMl9ppt7r19DxN8tTAn8n4w > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/Pifg3ABQVgvsFWLTIsI9yLR6RXA > > > > Thanks, > > - Xufeng > > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder < > > j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I have checked version -15 today. The document has improved quite a > > > bit. Thanks for taking my comments into account. Section 2.5 is much > > > clearer now and I believe the new MIB mapping section is helpful. > > > Thanks also for expanding the security considerations section and > > > adding the example in the Appendix. > > > > > > Below are some questions that came up during my review of -15: > > > > > > a) I did not validate the example in Appendix A using tools but I > > > wonder whether > > > > > > "pim-sm:sm": [null] > > > > > > is really correct. Should this not be > > > > > > "ietf-pim-sm:sm": [null] > > > > > > in JSON? There are multiple occurances of this. I think the 'sm' > > > node you refer to here is a container - so why would it be > [null]? > > > > > [Xufeng]: Fixed. > > > > > > > I also wonder whether this is correct: > > > > > > "source-address": "ietf-routing-types:*", > > > > > > RFC 7951 seems to indicate that this should simply be "*" and not > > > "ietf-routing-types:*". So again, has the example been validated? > > > > > > > [Xufeng]: Fixed. Also fixed the validation tool to correct other > errors in > > the example. > > > > > > > > b) You seem to use a notation in the tree diagrams that is not > defined > > > in draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-06.txt: > > > > > > +--rw <global configuration> > > > > > > I assume this means something like > > > > > > +--rw // global configuration > > > > > > but even that does not seem comply to the common tree diagram > > > notation. Perhaps simply state somewhere in Section 1.2 that > > > things in <> brackets are placeholders. > > > > > > > [Xufeng]: Added the description in Sec. 1.2. > > > > > > > > Why is section 1.2 called 'Tree Diagrams Prefixes' - should it > > > not be just "Tree Diagrams"? > > > > > > > [Xufeng]: Yes. Fixed. > > > > > > > > c) I am still unsure what 'wider management interfaces' are, perhaps > > > replace 'wider' with 'other'. > > > > > > > [Xufeng]: Changed as suggested. Thanks. > > > > > > > > d) Spelling errors: instnace, conatin, the the, cooresponding > > > > > > > [Xufeng]: Fixed. > > > > > > > > /js > > > > > > > > > >
- [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-… Jürgen Schönwälder
- Re: [pim] [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call re… Benoit Claise
- Re: [pim] [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call re… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-i… Xufeng Liu
- Re: [pim] [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call re… Xufeng Liu
- Re: [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-i… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-i… Xufeng Liu
- Re: [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-i… tom p.
- Re: [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-i… Xufeng Liu
- Re: [pim] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-i… tom p.