[tcpm] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-07: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for working on this useful specification.

I have noted the following which I think needs cross checking to make the
meaning clear, it might be simple oversight or intentional. I would like to
which one is correct.

- Section 4 :
     - any reason why the leaf send_id and recv_id does not use normative
     "MUST" in the description?

     - how should we interpret strongly " RECOMMENDED"? is this a MUST or
     RECOMMENDED?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


I have some minor observations, which we might want to address -

- Section 3.1 : It is not clear to me what is the difference between a "Global
configuration" and "Policies". To me policies can include global configurations
that will valid for all the TCP sessions. So, it is not clear is policy is a
special case of global configuration or vise verse.  Also the term "Global"
here seems ambiguous. I kind of read that as a global variable definition,
still the text need to be clear about the scope of "Global" is self, global to
what context?

- What are we really following when we say "directly following from TCP
standards."? a reference is needed here to understand what is meant here.