Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-11
Italo Busi <Italo.Busi@huawei.com> Wed, 24 February 2021 11:52 UTC
Return-Path: <Italo.Busi@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6CA3A1479; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 03:52:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hJC_Y6ilBdFB; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 03:52:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FC423A1490; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 03:52:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fraeml713-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.207]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4DlvHb4m99z67qZn; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 19:45:31 +0800 (CST)
Received: from fraeml715-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.34) by fraeml713-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 12:52:50 +0100
Received: from fraeml715-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.206.15.34]) by fraeml715-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.206.15.34]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.006; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 12:52:50 +0100
From: Italo Busi <Italo.Busi@huawei.com>
To: 'tom petch' <ietfa@btconnect.com>, "yang-doctors@ietf.org" <yang-doctors@ietf.org>, Martin Björklund <mbj+ietf@4668.se>
CC: "draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation.all@ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-11
Thread-Index: AQHW1KapF2DOK+K1Zk2HJGFUSzAY5KpndC2AgAApVwA=
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 11:52:50 +0000
Message-ID: <90431360dc9641f494264cc77d2969b0@huawei.com>
References: <160823152245.15025.13731491639863650578@ietfa.amsl.com> <DB7PR07MB5546474ADCC583030EFDF7BEA29F9@DB7PR07MB5546.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DB7PR07MB5546474ADCC583030EFDF7BEA29F9@DB7PR07MB5546.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.47.85.8]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/6DNdjKPwYFNjYlTN3MkktPg7bM4>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-11
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 11:52:55 -0000
Hi Tom, Yes, we have discussed this issue with the authors of ietf-te and the fix has been published in the -26 draft revision Now the IETF datatracker reports no errors/warnings for the path-computation draft Thanks to you and Martin for spotting it Italo > -----Original Message----- > From: tom petch [mailto:ietfa@btconnect.com] > Sent: mercoledì 24 febbraio 2021 11:24 > To: yang-doctors@ietf.org; Martin Björklund <mbj+ietf@4668.se> > Cc: draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation.all@ietf.org; teas@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-path- > computation-11 > > From: Teas <teas-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Martin Björklund via > Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> > Sent: 17 December 2020 18:58 > > Reviewer: Martin Björklund > Review result: Ready with Nits > > <tp> > > Martin's review flagged an error in the ietf-te module whereby a path > statement lacked prefixes causing validation to fail That module is updated in > teas-yang-te-26 to add those missing prefix which may overcome that issue. > > Tom Petch > > o General > > The language is called "YANG", not "Yang". > > > o 1.2. Tree Diagram > > The text says: > > A simplified graphical representation of the data model is used in > section 6.1 of this this document. The meaning of the symbols in > these diagrams is defined in [RFC8340]. > > Tree diagrams are used also in chapter 5. I suggest: > > Tree diagrams used in this document follow the notation defined in > [RFC8340]. > > > o Tree diagrams in general > > You can use pyang -f tree --tree-line-length 68 ... in order to > avoid long lines in the RFC. > > > o 6.1 > > This section presents a fully expanded tree diagram of the module. > Tree diagrams are mainly used to give an overview of a module's > structure. The tree diagram in this section spans 13 pages and is > quite hard to read. > > I also note that a majority of the nodes in this tree diagram come > from the expansion of groupings that aren't defined in this > document. Hence, I suggest that you might want to run: > > pyang -f tree --tree-line-length 68 \ > --tree-print-groupings --tree-no-expand-uses > > > o There are a number of groupings that are used only once, and do not > seem to be defined to be reused by other modules, e.g., > "requested-info", "requested-state", "svec-metrics-bounds" and more. > > If they are intended to be reused, it should be made clear in their > description statements. If not, I think they should be inlined and > removed. > > > o grouping svec-exclude > > This grouping has an ordered-by user list. Why is this list user > ordered? If the order matters, it should be explained how it matters. > > Also, the index leaf has this description: > > "XRO subobject index" > > What is "XRO"? Is this description sufficiently clear? > > > o path-request > > In the path-request, there is construct for path-refs: > > list primary-reverse-path-ref { > key index; > min-elements 1; > description > "The list of primary reverse paths that > reference this path as a candidate > secondary reverse path"; > leaf index { > type uint32; > description > "The index used by the > primary-reverse-path-ref list"; > } > > > What is this index? Is it only used as an arbitrary index, or > something else? If it is an arbitraty index, it should be explained > in the descriptions. > > Also note that lists in rpc input don't need an index. > > > o Validation > > The module fails YANG validation, but that is really due to errors > in ietf-te@2020-07-12.yang. Specifially, the leafref in the > grouping "path-compute-info" must have prefixes in its path. > Without prefixes, the path refers to nodes in the module that uses > the grouping. (same for other groupings in that module). > > > o Layout > > I suggest you run the module through > > pyang -f yang --yang-canonical --yang-line-length 68 > > in order to have the module indented and formatted consistently. > > This will make the RFC editor's job easier. > > > > /martin > > > > _______________________________________________ > Teas mailing list > Teas@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
- [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-tea… Martin Björklund via Datatracker
- [Teas] teas-yang-te invalid was Re: Yangdoctors e… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf… Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT/Vimercate)
- Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf… Italo Busi