[pim] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-yang-13: (with COMMENT)

Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 24 May 2019 17:37 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: pim@ietf.org
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFA85120125; Fri, 24 May 2019 10:37:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind_via_Datatracker?= <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-yang@ietf.org, Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, pim-chairs@ietf.org, stig@venaas.com, pim@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.97.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind?= <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
Message-ID: <155871943771.12273.17148916156796470545.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 10:37:17 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/6GIflcoJcrPeifFVHSI5qPdVHe4>
Subject: [pim] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-pim-igmp-mld-yang-13=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 24 May 2019 17:37:18 -0000

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-yang-13: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-yang/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Two quick questions:

1) Not sure about the current practice about YANG models but shouldn’t this
document eventually update RFC8349?

2) Also maybe it would make sense to discuss the sensitivity of
explicit-tracking separately in the security consideration section?