Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Early review: draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang
<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Wed, 17 January 2018 09:23 UTC
Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7479F12EBD3; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:23:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.629
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.629 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 gRgsyrfg0aog; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:23:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orange.com (mta239.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.66.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B242412EA9F; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:23:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from opfedar06.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.8]) by opfedar21.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 1089D1012C3; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 10:23:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.17]) by opfedar06.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id E01E380090; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 10:23:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM24.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::a1e6:3e6a:1f68:5f7e%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 10:23:14 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>, "draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang@ietf.org>
CC: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, "opsawg-chairs@ietf.org" <opsawg-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: RtgDir Early review: draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang
Thread-Index: AdOJMcFUkxJHSTpNTBO+YP/KPLATQQGQQncQ
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:23:14 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93300A0B4383@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE29230B9C8@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE29230B9C8@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.2]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/jzbOsLRChV9cjEotn9zWc35pS_w>
Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Early review: draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Directorate <rtg-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:23:18 -0000
Dear Mach,
Thank you for the review.
I submitted an updated version that fixes some of the nits (two or three long lines).
Idnits displays the following:
== There are 3 instances of lines with non-RFC6890-compliant IPv4 addresses
in the document. If these are example addresses, they should be changed.
which is not a nit! These addresses are well-known IP address that are reserved initially in Section 5.7 of RFC6333 and generalized in RFC 7335.
Also, idnits complains about some "weird spacing". These spaces are auto-generated and formatted by pyang. Idnits does not parse adequately yang trees, IMO. This bug was already shared with tools-discuss@ietf.org.
Cheers,
Med
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Mach Chen [mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com]
> Envoyé : mardi 9 janvier 2018 11:54
> À : draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang@ietf.org
> Cc : rtg-dir@ietf.org; opsawg-chairs@ietf.org
> Objet : RtgDir Early review: draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang
>
> Hello
>
> I have been selected to do a routing directorate "early" review of this
> draft.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/ draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang/
>
> The routing directorate will, on request from the working group chair,
> perform an "early" review of a draft before it is submitted for
> publication to the IESG. The early review can be performed at any time
> during the draft's lifetime as a working group document. The purpose of
> the early review depends on the stage that the document has reached. As
> this document is in working group last call, my focus for the review was
> to determine whether the document is ready to be published. Please
> consider my comments along with the other working group last call
> comments.
>
> For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
>
> Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-09
> Reviewer: Mach Chen
> Review Date: 9 Jan 2018
> Intended Status: Standards Track
>
> Summary:
>
> No issues found. This documents is ready to proceed to the IESG.
>
> BTW, idnits tool shows there are some warnings, it's better to address
> them before publication.
>
> Best regards,
> Mach
- [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Early review: draft-ietf-opsawg-… Mach Chen
- Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Early review: draft-ietf-ops… mohamed.boucadair