IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-acee-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend-07.txt

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Thu, 02 August 2018 14:03 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08DB4130E6D for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 07:03:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 YO6R4HzWNbug for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 07:03:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B15B9130E55 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 07:03:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1688; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1533218598; x=1534428198; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=sHWf/6MbjkaB2sRqk4weKU5vyU6dE1iyIR94JJEMp+c=; b=k6QvRBjRBTiZ1QnuTRk0OzDRSqnzOc3HOMeTkPUqRNSFIaIWWbPffdvw n9ZLUxKMJKfuNVCLY6nFo8JmGL+dB2fzCozvsgL3LDi05XEBvOil5MyCv PttReFEbw3SSfs7Dp94AC40RuNZsRX1hNKFzYfCrr17D/KNWmnZnryBPz 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AdBwB2DmNb/4gNJK1bGgEBAQEBAgEBAQEIAQEBAYNOgWIoCoN0lEiBaINhkh6BeguEbAIXgm4hNhYBAgEBAgEBAm0ohTcGIxFFEAIBCBoCJgICAjAVEAIEDgWDIIIAsT2BLoRehXmBC4d9F4IAgRInDBOCTIR+gwExgiQCmiYJAo9AjhSSIgIRFIEkJAkogVJwFWUBgj6QU2+Nb4EbAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,436,1526342400"; d="scan'208";a="151954082"
Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Aug 2018 14:03:18 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (xch-rtp-013.cisco.com [64.101.220.153]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w72E3HVK011781 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:03:17 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 10:03:17 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 10:03:17 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: tom petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>
CC: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-acee-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend-07.txt
Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-acee-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend-07.txt
Thread-Index: AQHUKk4ZEnP9/0uvUkC2fjoaY3lj9KSsfoEA
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 14:03:17 +0000
Message-ID: <988918E2-9770-4E4C-8E93-2E7A2EBAC7B7@cisco.com>
References: <151806747640.17184.1735281072604280039.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <465AE72F-858F-4FA2-BB40-616D7FAEF61B@cisco.com> <037201d42a4d$a9d453e0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
In-Reply-To: <037201d42a4d$a9d453e0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.201]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <BADBFEBE563E544885B2C09D8D4290CB@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 64.101.220.153, xch-rtp-013.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/54ieWBNXTQSOgmZGlgHMVvBVnTc>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 14:03:20 -0000

Hi Tom, 
We knew we had some of these to address before asking for working group adoption but you have pointed out others that we missed. I agree we need a better prefix with expectation that this will probably not be the last augmentation to ietf-routing.yang. 
Thanks Again, 
Acee and Yingzhen

On 8/2/18, 6:46 AM, "tom petch" <ietfa@btconnect.com> wrote:

    Another YANG I-D from the Routing Area; I wonder what I will find if I
    browse it:-)
    
    - Abstract contains a [Reference]
    
    - No reference for YANG Tree Diagrams
    
    - No mention of the current YANG 1.1 RFC
    
    - No YANG version statement in the module
    
    - No mention of NMDA in the body of the I-D (but it does appear in the
    YANG Module)
    
    - No references for the imported modules and the RFC in question do not
    appear in the I-D Normative References
    
    - YANG module references RFC8242 which does not appear in the I-D
    Normative References
    
    - RFC 6536 is obsolete
    
    - I wonder at the choice of prefix for this module - since the module is
    all about extensions to the rib, then naming it just 'rib' seems
    misleading.
    
    Tom Petch

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email