[pim] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-snooping-yang-16: (with COMMENT)

Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 08 July 2020 08:12 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 C17383A0C38; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 01:12:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-snooping-yang@ietf.org, pim-chairs@ietf.org, pim@ietf.org, Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.7.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Murray Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <159419594277.5069.9537319405115430156@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2020 01:12:22 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/D0fAuTkALlca3foVZOrdudzcXEQ>
Subject: [pim] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-snooping-yang-16: (with COMMENT)
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: Wed, 08 Jul 2020 08:12:23 -0000

Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-snooping-yang-16: 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:


I'm almost hitting the "DISCUSS" button here over the fact that the shepherd
writeup warned in several places that the YANG in this document had issues. 
Were these resolved?

> There was an early YANG doctor review that found some issues. I believe the
should be resolved. There are some errors compiling the model though.

> Early YANG doctor review was done. It would be good to get another check to
see if everything is fine now.

> There are some minor nits as found by the tool, and YANG validation has a few

> The early YANG doctor review only found minor issues, which should be
addressed in version 08.  [We're at -16 now; was this never updated?]

Section 3:

* "The YANG data model defined in this document conforms to the Network
Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342]." -- This text also appears
in Section 2.

Section 5:

* I concur with Roman's suggestion to refer here to RFC 4541.

Section 6:

* I suggest this be split into two subsections, which in my experience is more
conventional (but not required).


There's a bug in whatever rendering engine was used here.  The footer for page
1 says the document expires January 2021, but all others say 2020.