[RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang-25
Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Sun, 12 July 2020 15:15 UTC
Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 861603A0B2E for <rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 08:15:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 PFNhYw7YyzNk for <rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 08:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy3-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy3-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.30.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC15F3A0B22 for <rtg-dir@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 08:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CMGW (unknown [10.9.0.13]) by gproxy3.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53927403B3 for <rtg-dir@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:15:36 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id udhYjcpdaUY3DudhYjIoD0; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:15:36 -0600
X-Authority-Reason: nr=8
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=HPSzLslv c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=_RQrkK6FrEwA:10 a=Vy_oeq2dmq0A:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=71oK6CGHiXvCkhcOMeUA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Cc:To:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=TSWYzR1Juw2RE3dVYLTRDp+tllRjZwCHq+GuO6wiwPk=; b=n3eiCt4lcpjYLh6BOe4L+k3or9 o2hvFA9wjXB49PYSJnqEl1ahofOBunph+nlY44HL08A6kJqGixFw22Gp1ypOFHZAZdUCwDREVg/e1 fnxFmbH7bs0ZNkYbqGdy8XMER;
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (port=15341 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1judhX-0003fQ-Uw; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:15:36 -0600
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
To: Routing ADs <rtg-ads@ietf.org>
Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang.all@ietf.org, CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <45db451d-9f8e-7a0d-d275-de1fd383cda6@labn.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 11:15:34 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-Source-L: Yes
X-Exim-ID: 1judhX-0003fQ-Uw
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: ([IPv6:::1]) [127.0.0.1]:15341
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 2
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Org: HG=bhcustomer;ORG=bluehost;
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/mO7LXUfaMkwxrppSdLo584OkaGs>
Subject: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang-25
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 15:15:40 -0000
I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang-25.txt Reviewer: Lou Berger Review Date: July 12, 2020 IETF LC End Date: date-if-known Intended Status: Proposed Standard Summary: I have a minor concern about this document that I think should be resolved before publication. Comments: This seems to be a straight forward YANG model that augments draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo with basic WSON information. I think it may be hard for those not intimate with optical switching, and TE to follow, but no so for those working with these technologies. I have one question/issue that I think that should be resolved before publication. Major Issues: None Minor Issues: I may be missing something, but it seems to me that there are number of elements/leaves marked rw that should be ro. For example are reconfigurable-node or grid-type really going to be writable? If I understand the model correctly, there will be some cases there leaves under grid type will be writable -- in this case shouldn't the grid-type case statements be limited to the label-restriction/grid-type? Again, please let me know if I'm missing something. Nit: I'm marking this comment as a nit as it is somewhat stylistic. I'm not a fan of defining groupings that are unlikely to be reused. 'grouping wson-node-attributes' is used once - I suggest just moving the container (or even just the leaf) to the one place it is used in the model. I also note that the YANGdoctor review comments are out of date and should be revisited. That's it! Lou