Re: [pim] WGLC for draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang-04

Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com> Sat, 22 September 2018 00:45 UTC

Return-Path: <stig@venaas.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 7590D130DC8 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 stW4y5j163n0 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:45:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52d.google.com (mail-ed1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52d]) (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 F35B91293FB for <pim@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:45:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id f38-v6so12042258edd.8 for <pim@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:45:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Gglv6JQdK3/l/bg+4dw/Y0QlqvlFK9s5IV+m/KuplNo=; b=pLPzyh1I45LCF+8oWTNIpSNPTLhirudhD4HVotE56g2RG/kX7aGMWZCDUygHbNbCYH Lj/z4MAADfH7M1lT/A7kpAfCm74GjLAIze1+PSUv67XcRZsUuZ59z3s6EgeiUdjdGy2n E8W7ONB0HMoLnwC13ZdSVTwJpgpiHPpFu2phh9lkL+fQNR29KL/Ed50bmfjXRnOVYsvc 23CWlnlF1J0C8mmIEIGvb8srJG1XI91uReT2Z9vJ7UQUeAGcEumN9nlChoDF3t3p1VP+ PPppUhL3BQy9fsEpbf2vHm7QwrpfZqqVGA4bzaZe7h1IoOa+9eLrQPwpq7N6ZrkyvKDV mWAg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Gglv6JQdK3/l/bg+4dw/Y0QlqvlFK9s5IV+m/KuplNo=; b=IdWivbuuSdnx2QwTVqo+bel8gPeGuTyKF8n5Y69M8uBY2L0diFMDUusU+5qX30DJO1 llSBFkNlIRO9WQxzAzCjlmVnsSD9DzaDPUvY9nmv1ko4jDlykVKAgxV6UzsnhrpRUHni KsMb5kNIiQwtsgDKmfr/g4LRrLz+dRh9z21RuQIJdI7y9YF/K1WBm8AkYardt21ABzB0 k8dQ3aVGhZL5zXnJsOYjOlWfWQe+UTL//KsKbKwOmiKg44Sq5XJNuCg///gQH+nMbT3M T6gdsvjIXFVOqr2HOBbMvSLpaCTiRe93Jg2Q/GbiPeavtAic0QLyZJ7Qu68qK8xC0y6k gdSQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfohunrk/2UV7iyrLNhbJv8EezlUggv2N1rp3AmB4wC4Eeguz4pcs UzY3cFc4CHfsgKPk272XdPH+Img94t//wiLqS1iGFQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbrALzfXA9XZ1syOvlW5RitBBuO2eTwGn+Ms5QfIHal1IogrnSW/j0msfJPkLHox+f1mGusKJk3vII+YOd1hWA=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d74f:: with SMTP id a15-v6mr340273eds.102.1537577148459; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHANBtJYjqaa5GP=0kybwLtUBNG+Kafg8NEz2VxVhF13bgMKzw@mail.gmail.com> <0EA79DA9-F693-45C2-8B1C-E0BDE4648DD9@akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <0EA79DA9-F693-45C2-8B1C-E0BDE4648DD9@akamai.com>
From: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:45:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHANBtJp8fswgGs80Xo8_o1r0AiCLOSgNtLrib07iYdf0t1kCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: jholland=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org
Cc: pim@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/o_JH39hUJ3XJaZ6Znj1Na3erRJA>
Subject: Re: [pim] WGLC for draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang-04
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 22 Sep 2018 00:45:52 -0000

Hi

I wish we had more responses to the WGLC. The WG members need to
participate more. However, with authors from several vendors, reviews
by YANG doctor, Jake and I, I think we can say that it passed this
second WGLC. Please address Jake's comments and then we can request
publication.

Stig

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 8:49 PM Holland, Jake
<jholland=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Sandy,
>
> Thanks for working on this. I read through it, and I saw a few points I thought I should mention.
>
> 1.
> I noticed that this is Standards Track, but it has normative references to MSDP (RFC 3168), which is Experimental.
>
> I remember seeing in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4611#section-1.1 that a variance was required for a similar downref.
>
> If I understand the process in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-9.1 correctly, we'd either need this document to be Experimental instead of Standards Track, or we'd need to justify a similar variance.
>
> So I suggest making this doc Experimental.
>
> 2.
> I noticed the filter acls were strings, but there's no definition of the format or meaning of the strings, that I saw.
>
> Maybe the filters should use the acl-base type from https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-19#section-4.1 ?
>
> Either that or define the semantics of the strings in the acls, and how they filter.
>
> 3.
> I also saw a few nits:
> - section 6 is just: " No notification is defined in this model."
> Maybe it's better to remove the section?
>
> - section 3 I think there's a grammar error. Suggestion:
> OLD:
> The filter features allow operators to avoid some SA information be forwarded to some peers.
> NEW:
> The filter features selectively allow operators to prevent SA information from being forwarded to peers.
>
> - section 5 I think there's a missing word. Suggestion:
> OLD:
> The part is used to define some useful and ordinary operations
> NEW:
> The RPC part is used to define some useful and ordinary operations
>
>
> I have no other objections, I think it looks ok overall, as far as I can tell.
>
> Kind regards,
> Jake
>
> ´╗┐On 2018-08-27, 16:54, "Stig Venaas" <stig@venaas.com> wrote:
>
>     Hi
>
>     This is the second WGLC for this document. There was no feedback
>     during the first last call in February, but the document has been
>     revised and improved since then. Mike and I believe it is time for
>     another last call.
>
>     Please respond by September 10th whether you believe it is ready for
>     publication, and what issues you may have with the document.
>
>     Thanks,
>     Stig
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     pim mailing list
>     pim@ietf.org
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pim mailing list
> pim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim