Re: [Rtg-dt-yang-arch] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-04

Hi Jeff, 
Then -05 version fixed most of the nits. I just posted (before the WG
Chairs chat) the 06 version which addressed a couple residual nits. I did
not change 224.0.0.0 - 239.255.255.255 to avoid the non-example IPv4
address warning or move the 2 IANA directory references from Normative to
Informative to get around the “Possible down reference” comments. I view
these as noise.  
Thanks,
Acee 

On 6/13/17, 5:38 AM, "Jeff Tantsura" <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

>Acee,
>
>Please fix nits.
> 
>Cheers,
>Jeff
> 
>
>On 6/13/17, 00:45, "Rtg-dt-yang-arch on behalf of Jeff Tantsura"
><rtg-dt-yang-arch-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of jefftant@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>    Hi Acee,
>    
>    Thanks, will do.
>    
>    Regards,
>    Jeff
>    
>    > On Jun 12, 2017, at 17:39, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com>
>wrote:
>    > 
>    > Jeff, Chris,
>    > 
>    > The authors believe we are ready for a WG last call.
>    > 
>    > Thanks,
>    > Acee 
>    > 
>    >> On 6/12/17, 2:32 AM, "Radek Krejčí" <rkrejci@cesnet.cz> wrote:
>    >> 
>    >> Hi Acee,
>    >> 
>    >> sorry for the delay. I've checked the changes and the document as
>well as
>    >> both the modules seem fine to me now.
>    >> 
>    >> Regards,
>    >> Radek
>    >> 
>    >> 
>    >> Dne 24.5.2017 v 18:23 Acee Lindem (acee) napsal(a):
>    >>> Hi Radek, 
>    >>> 
>    >>> I believe I have addressed your YANG Doctor comments in the -05
>version
>    >>> of
>    >>> the draft. I used the template in RFC6087Bis, Appendix C which
>resulted
>    >>> in
>    >>> some reorganization of ietf-routing-types.
>    >>> 
>    >>> Thanks,
>    >>> Acee 
>    >>> 
>    >>>> On 5/24/17, 6:45 AM, "Radek Krejčí" <rkrejci@cesnet.cz> wrote:
>    >>>> 
>    >>>> Reviewer: Radek Krejčí
>    >>>> Review result: Ready with Nits
>    >>>> 
>    >>>> I have reviewed changes made to draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types
>between
>    >>>> revision 02 and 04 (04 was published just a week after 03). The
>main
>    >>>> change is splitting the module into 2 modules:
>ietf-routing-types and
>    >>>> iana-routing-types.
>    >>>> 
>    >>>> iana-routing-types:
>    >>>> - since it is IANA-maintained module, IANA should be the
>'organization'
>    >>>> and also the 'contact' value should be changed accordingly (see
>    >>>> iana-if-type)
>    >>>> 
>    >>>> ietf-routing-types:
>    >>>> - please follow the contact template available in RFC 6087
>Appendix B
>    >>>> (or
>    >>>> RFC6087bis, Appendix C)
>    >>>> 
>    >>>> draft text:
>    >>>> - if iana-routing-types is supposed to be IANA-maintained
>module, isn't
>    >>>> IANA also supposed to be XML registrant contact (IANA
>Considerations
>    >>>> section)?
>    >>>> - my fault from previous review - since the module imports
>    >>>> ietf-yang-types, it MUST contain reference to its RFC, which is
>RFC
>    >>>> 6991
>    >>>> (not RFC 6021 as I wrote in my review). So move RFC 6991
>reference from
>    >>>> Informative references section into Normative references where
>it will
>    >>>> replace reference to RFC 6021.
>    >>>> 
>    >>>> Radek
>    >> 
>    > 
>    
>    _______________________________________________
>    Rtg-dt-yang-arch mailing list
>    Rtg-dt-yang-arch@ietf.org
>    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dt-yang-arch
>    
>
>