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

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

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08DB4130E6D for <>; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 07:03:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YO6R4HzWNbug for <>; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 07:03:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B15B9130E55 for <>; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 07:03:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; 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: =?us-ascii?q?A0AdBwB2DmNb/4gNJK1bGgEBAQEBAgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEIAQEBAYNOgWIoCoN0lEiBaINhkh6BeguEbAIXgm4hNhYBAgEBAgEBAm0?= =?us-ascii?q?ohTcGIxFFEAIBCBoCJgICAjAVEAIEDgWDIIIAsT2BLoRehXmBC4d9F4IAgRI?= =?us-ascii?q?nDBOCTIR+gwExgiQCmiYJAo9AjhSSIgIRFIEkJAkogVJwFWUBgj6QU2+Nb4E?= =?us-ascii?q?bAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,436,1526342400"; d="scan'208";a="151954082"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Aug 2018 14:03:18 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (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 ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 10:03:17 -0400
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 10:03:17 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>
To: tom petch <>
CC: "" <>
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, 2 Aug 2018 14:03:17 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <037201d42a4d$a9d453e0$>
In-Reply-To: <037201d42a4d$a9d453e0$>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-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" <> 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
    Tom Petch