Re: [Softwires] WGLC for draft-ietf-softwire-yang-04 as Standard Track, closed by 27 June 2018

Sheng Jiang <> Wed, 27 June 2018 03:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71271130F39; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 20:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.19
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.19 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KiKM4ghvE55N; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 20:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE897131165; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 20:59:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 4439B819CC4F3; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 04:59:49 +0100 (IST)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.382.0; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 04:59:49 +0100
Received: from ([fe80::a54a:89d2:c471:ff]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 11:59:46 +0800
From: Sheng Jiang <>
To: Softwires WG <>
CC: "" <>
Thread-Topic: WGLC for draft-ietf-softwire-yang-04 as Standard Track, closed by 27 June 2018
Thread-Index: AdQC+hwArZYPu3auQDGWSI0pkruopgKz1XLA
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 03:59:45 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B92900F175CNKGEML515MBXchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] WGLC for draft-ietf-softwire-yang-04 as Standard Track, closed by 27 June 2018
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 04:00:05 -0000

As the document shepherd, I have reviewed this document. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. In general, I think this document is in a good shape. The YANG model is well defined and clearly described.
Here are some minor issues, mostly editorial, although there is 1 error report by the IETF Yang validation tool. It should be easy to be fixed, I blieve

There are some minor comments below, most of them are editorial.

Section 2.1
It may be better to add the statement names in the description of choice statement:
  a choice statement 'ce-type' is included for ...
  a choice statement 'data-plane' is included to ...

"For each module, a choice statement is included for either 'binding' or 'algorithmic'."
But in Table 1 it is 'algorithm'. Maybe 'algorithmic' should be changed to 'algorithm'.

Section 2.2
The reference to Appendix A.3 should be Appendix A

Section 3.1
"for all of the softwire mechanisms listed in Section 1"
It may be bette to avoid self citation and just list the mechanisms here.

"Figure 1 describes the tree structure of the CE softwire YANG module"
It's better to unify the terminology as "Softwire CE YANG Module"

Section 3.2
In the paragraph of "softwire-path-mru:":
It's confusing here whether the MRU is for IPv4 or IPv6.

There are two "br-ipv6-addr" defined. It may be better to add different prefixes or suffixes into the names, but I'm also OK with the current names.

In the paragraph of "ce-binding-ipv6-addr-change:":
"binding-ipv6-address" is not defined in the whole document. It should be explained.

Section 4.2
"in Figure 1"
should be "in Section 3.2"

"for logging/data retention purposes" -> "for logging or data retention purposes"

"between 3-tuples, which contains the lwB4's IPv6 address..." -> "between 3-tuples: the lwB4's IPv6 address..."

>From the description, I think it may be better to rename it to "softwire-num-max".
In the paratraph of "invalid-entry, added-entry, modified-entry:":
"the client" -> "the NETCONF client"

Appendix A.1
"lwB4 IPv6 Address:          123"
What's the "lwB4 IPv6 Address" here?

Appendix A.2
"for the clients" -> "for the CEs"

Appendix A.3
The same "lwB4 IPv6 Address" issue
And the PSID and PSID offset should be provided in the example.



From: Softwires [] On Behalf Of Sheng Jiang
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 5:44 PM
To: Softwires WG <>
Subject: [Softwires] WGLC for draft-ietf-softwire-yang-04 as Standard Track, closed by 27 June 2018

This email announces a Softwire Working Group Last Call (WGLC) on:

Since both chairs of softwire WG are the co-authors of this document. I am now acting as the document shepherd for this draft.

YANG Modules for IPv4-in-IPv6 Address plus Port Softwires


This draft is intended to become a Standard Track RFC.

This WGLC will run through the end of the day on Wednesday, June 27, 2018.

Comments should be sent to the<> list, although purely

editorial comments may be sent directly to the author.

No IPR disclosures have been submitted directly on


Regards and thanks,

Sheng Jiang (document shepherd)