Re: Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-bfd-stability-08

[Ebben Aries <[e-mail]>]

On Mar 25 10:11 AM, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
> Hi Ebben,
> 
> Thanks first of all for the review.
> 
> 
>     On Mar 21, 2021, at 2:10 PM, Ebben Aries via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
>     wrote:
> 
>     Reviewer: Ebben Aries
>     Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
>     One of the simpler YD reviews since this draft contains only a single
>     module
>     with a single r/o leaf augment to various other BFD module nodes.
> 
>     1 module in this draft:
>     - [e-mail]
> 
>     YANG compiler errors or warnings (pyang 2.4.0, yanglint 1.10.17, confdc
>     7.2.3.4)
>     - warning: RFC 8407: 3.1: The IETF Trust Copyright statement seems to be
>     missing
>      - Minor issue just due to slight wording adjustment from copyright info
>        normally used in the draft/RFC itself
>        https://trustee.ietf.org/documents/trust-legal-provisions/tlp-5/
> 
> 
> I cut and pasted the text from ’pyang —ietf-help’ and it still gives me the
> error. Go figure!

The following should be the correct wording to pass the ietf checks:

--- yang/[e-mail]	2021-03-29 17:31:29.494394915 -0600
+++ yang/[e-mail]	2021-03-29 17:31:23.152419684 -0600
@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@
      a per session count for BFD packets that are lost.

      Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
-     the document authors.  All rights reserved.
+     authors of the code.  All rights reserved.
      Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
      without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
      to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD

$ pyang --ietf-help

Validates the module or submodule according to the IETF rules found
in RFC 8407.

The module's or submodule's description statement must contain the
following text:

     Copyright (c) <year> IETF Trust and the persons identified as
     authors of the code.  All rights reserved.
...


> 
> 
> 
>     Module [e-mail]:
>     - Contact information should follow formatting seen in other published
>      modules.  Just some minor cleanup/readjustments here.
> 
> 
> Do you e-mail addresses of the authors? If so, they were written as such to
> prevent online email extractors from extracting email addresses.
> 

Following RFC8407 includes the 'WG List' as <mailto:[e-mail]>
followed by an 'Editor:' block with Names/emails listed in the above
format as well.  Obfuscating email addresses as you have it (not sure
I've seen any other modules attempt this) is unlikely to provide any
benefit (These same email addresses are also listed in the draft/RFC
document itself unobfuscated)

Thx

/ebben

> 
>     - Various augments will augment the respective 'session-statistics'
>     container
>      however for 'bfd-lag:member-links/micro-bfd-ipv4',
>      'bfd-lag:member-links/micro-bfd-ipv6' and 'bfd-mpls:sessions' these
>     augments
>      sit in parallel to that container.  Is there any reason this is not
>      consistent?
> 
> 
> 
> Good catch. Have added a path to “session-statistics” container.
> 
>   augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/" +
>           "rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-lag:lag/" +
>           "bfd-lag:sessions/bfd-lag:session/bfd-lag:member-links/" +
>           "bfd-lag:micro-bfd-ipv4/bfd-lag:session-statistics" {
> 
> 
>     General comments on the draft/modules:
>     - Section 7.2: It is stated the document registers "2" YANG modules when it
>     is
>      infact only a single module
> 
> 
> Fixed.
> 
> 
> 
>     Overall, just minor nits and view as ready from a YANG doctor review
>     standpoint once the above is addressed
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> [e-mail]
> 
> 
> 
> 
>