Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-01
Martin Björklund via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 19 August 2019 11:29 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6945712011F; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 04:29:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Martin Björklund via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: yang-doctors@ietf.org
Cc: rtg-bfd@ietf.org, draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-unsolicited-01
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.100.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Martin Björklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Message-ID: <156621414936.19813.853283734958376284@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 04:29:09 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/40EcgCsald2ZBdPFNWiDzC_A4Rw>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-bfd/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:29:10 -0000
Reviewer: Martin Björklund Review result: Ready with Nits I have reviewed this document from a YANG model perspective only. My only comment is actually for a grouping defined in ietf-bfd-type, but used in this module. There is a choice "interval-config-type": +--rw unsolicited {bfd-unsol:unsolicited-params-global}? +--rw enable? boolean +--rw local-multiplier? multiplier +--rw (interval-config-type)? +--:(tx-rx-intervals) | +--rw desired-min-tx-interval? uint32 | +--rw required-min-rx-interval? uint32 +--:(single-interval) {single-minimum-interval}? +--rw min-interval? uint32 This choice is not mandatory and doesn't have a default case, so the question is what happens if no nodes from the choice has been configured? I would expect the choice to have a default case (but this then would apply to ietf-bfd-types, not this document.)
- Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-unsoli… Martin Björklund via Datatracker
- Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-un… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-un… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-un… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-un… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-un… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-un… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-un… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-bfd-un… Jeffrey Haas
- Changes to BFD Yang module in RFC editors queue (… Jeffrey Haas