Re: [sfc] IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit

Hi,

The document is in a good shape for publication as an Experimental
RFC. Just a few comments that can handled along the way -

- Abstract,  Add a sentence about the presence of a Yang model in this I-D
- Section 1, Add a reference when the Shamir's Secret Sharing on first use
Also you have it as a normative reference to a wiki page -

[SSS]      "Shamir's Secret Sharing",
              <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir%27s_Secret_Sharing>.

Isn't there a better reference for this which is archival in nature
and cant be modified easily?

- Section 2, Use the updated boilerplate for capitalized keywords -

      The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
      NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED",
      "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as
      described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they
      appear in all capitals, as shown here.

- Section 5, You include -

   This document does not
   define a specific protocol to be used between Controller and nodes.
   It only defines the procedures and the associated YANG data model.

That is true for all documents with yang models, any reason to be
explicit about it?

- Section 5.2.2, You should include this -

   A simplified graphical representation of the data model is used in
   this document.  The meaning of the symbols in these diagrams is
   defined in [RFC8340].

instead of repeating the tree notations.

- Section 5.2.3,
    o  Update the dates in the Yang model as well the year in the copyright
    o  Query: Should nacm be used in the Yang model for the secret leaves?

- Section 6
   o  Don't we need to update the IANA consideration for the Yang model?

- Section 7.8
   o  Needs to be enhancecd to also include yang related security as
per https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines

Thanks!
Dhruv

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 7:12 PM Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
>
> The chairs are starting the WG last call for
> draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit.  Please reply explicitly whether you
> think this is ready to go to the IETF for publication as a Experimental RFC.
> As noted below, the call runs through June 30.
>
> Note that silence does not imply consent, so please speak up.
>
> Yours,
> Joel (& Jim)
>
> On 6/16/2020 9:32 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
> >
> > The IETF WG state of draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit has been changed to "In
> > WG Last Call" from "WG Document" by Joel Halpern:
> >
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit/
> >
> > Comment:
> > This starts WG last call for this document, ending June 30.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> sfc mailing list
> sfc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc