Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang-10
Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 20 February 2021 13:26 UTC
Return-Path: <dhruv.ietf@gmail.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 C55033A1387; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:26:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 XqCtFGPxyOMc; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:26:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A51E13A1386; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:26:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id n13so20845282ejx.12; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:26:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=h2bRf1rEzp0u56DnslE42IilrMH1IQ89EcEcGfULU/s=; b=bmjNiIWbjZ4C6TtjZM55ieGXp83kHMOmhGkZjzM7qqWq6WI2u2PZuKmbUDvP/n2Tw+ nFenYq2WbIJqxsvSgafXxxzI36eomNtk4uCfj3WvJqQEFNL35ff0/ThCBy5gYFQwL7TG X08f8cvUJQOG4gaQR302SDJusFQIKX4i8C58CSjjGV97liPyM6sVFWCuc8Q+LjWww+7D PR5Cwcyta0G2KqEUFrxsy4S5c0FUxuc2TC8g3BIVjy7wrhJjQoLDVEhr+rDGgWgwlk2k fHTBATBwR2ak3Ztuy41VqG509nIJZCIhumgdfWTuCXIEpgnFvwoGA2AJJ6Y1j8JbphbH be5g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=h2bRf1rEzp0u56DnslE42IilrMH1IQ89EcEcGfULU/s=; b=YuIsgVnQ8YOArsIm5vIBaob83/Y3y2GLT7+E8CSYSBIl/05n8wO1aQHAHeAWLsp0t9 DGm9K/hh8rVgRriVXUgLi7Lkrig7OQqelYVL6vF7Wx9+BzzCIrn5/HdpSKglL8JYXfTg jWIsE3pnDMBuM1Svs1/3skajFHOUmCtvMWOHV1oeeFz64pH6mYgomc63liFA9j9Vpeaq vr02ywTwmEhJahS2nDL/QoxG/So35scJP9qaJtdwUUPLtnYx1PRn+4cUvD+V46NdA2Kg eonb4DubuXAj2yPDN2hsF4BmUA8IWa8uRT4NA+iWiuFEcbbG3HBVCVM4UvuAlfspAYzW EO6g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530crGq10CRcl5UgtkvN8D9MXKIZMaSmTCWEqYGD4s57UdfVMVrG VNHwA/4RDKhGVSiVhalH+GOWnbmrqMJD+57ISQ+sYACGVsWMDA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyXm9x9heW1giuGKASKy8g0cwvhz9RLsl4VL6qF8UVZ/NGulbu0j73VgYC4joeEIAjVuqQWs/hh8oZtznuW5Xs=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3885:: with SMTP id q5mr13203319ejd.105.1613827560794; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:26:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <160847918971.3738.423965928103853275@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <160847918971.3738.423965928103853275@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 18:55:24 +0530
Message-ID: <CAB75xn7KxxgNT++hLcNKbRAVuQ7zMbkGcfZMtB0JJARPYmaR5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Cc: yang-doctors@ietf.org, draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang.all@ietf.org, "TEAS WG (teas@ietf.org)" <teas@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007d6c3305bbc48254"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/a5aP9pD7iddU9qZSTXFeDxMVUhc>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang-10
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: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 13:26:05 -0000
Hi Andy, Thanks for your review. The new -11 version is out which takes your comments into consideration. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang/ A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang-11 Thanks! Dhruv On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 9:16 PM Andy Bierman via Datatracker < noreply@ietf.org> wrote: > Reviewer: Andy Bierman > Review result: Ready with Issues > > > Major Issues: > > None > > Moderate Issues: > > 1) > leaf /ap/access-point-list/access-point-id > leaf /vn/vn-list/vn-id > leaf /vn/vn-list/vn-member-list/vn-member-id > > These list keys use type inet:uri. > You should consider the implementation complexity here. > Will servers all correctly convert any arbitrary URI to its canonical > representation? The draft should address this issue. > > 2) > leaf /vn/vn-list/oper-status > leaf /vn/vn-list/admin-status > > These objects use vn-status-type, vn-admin-state-type > The use of identities for even simple "up/down" status types > seems extreme. The conformance for an enumeration is clear > (mandatory), but not for an identityref type. > - E.g., Is is mandatory for a vendor to support vn-state-up,down? > A vendor could write their own identities and ignore the standard > identities. > > > 3) > rpc /vn-compute > The procedure for this operation is not explained here. > A full description or reference to normative test is needed. > - what does the server do with the input? > - what output is expected? Any variants based on the inputs > should be explained. > - any interoperability considerations wrt/ use of these > common groupings in this RPC context? > - what errors can occur? Specify any error-tags, etc. that > the server MUST/SHOULD include in the response > > > Minor Issues: > > 4) > - naming inconsistent within /ap and /vn > access-point is spelled out and vn is not > Suggest: shorten access-point to ap > > 5) > - naming a list entry with the the suffix -list is redundant. > YANG lists do not have any conceptual container or way to > reference all the entries (if that what this naming intends) > Suggest: > s/access-point-list/ap/ > s/vn-list/vn/ > s/vn-member-list/vn-member/ > > 6) > - leaf /vn/vn-list/vn-member-list/src/multi-src > - leaf /vn/vn-list/vn-member-list/dest/multi-dest > Looks like these leafs should each have a default-stmt. > What does it mean if the multi-src-dest feature is supported > but these leafs are missing from the config? > > > >
- [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-tea… Andy Bierman via Datatracker
- Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf… tom petch
- Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf… Andy Bierman
- Re: [Teas] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf… tom petch