Re: [Teas] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-15

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Thu, 07 June 2018 01:44 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 E27EA130E16; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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=cooperw.in header.b=pZMxRWSm; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=GPJTzDer
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 ncCtbhkugG_i; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58DB8131074; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7AE421D40; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 21:44:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 06 Jun 2018 21:44:51 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=RivlsthLV13pbXgQemQ/KuQgS1lUM BNmt/eBCkyBVCg=; b=pZMxRWSmyso60zTAdmHAYWSKzKhPB4tTemMSpd8hhzyON UxiHz1RsxTdhlZbN1Ku/Yr5zBseqx+oSDbhlXf+54BhawBABUmMSdwA9xIQZZODk wwNWKmgW7Uv+8jw8WWYiNqU1D9/BrAl7lBNBQe/zz/CbfqBrJw0KawVtDXrp6afu y2FL1afgVhBITZJEOxyHRRUS52k6jZvbDrNxUprz37OlW7yjCPhyTftypAAWIX2s 72uzqyHlKfCbhZcaQBjmvxPIdo0ylHsPBPyr/iwSN7x0ebSZ4h3Io1QPU4iBnQUs xLPyuJJa6k4xftuP9kxWGD3Gl0+0vuhGjuhd9V3sg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Rivlst hLV13pbXgQemQ/KuQgS1lUMBNmt/eBCkyBVCg=; b=GPJTzDerrYshBt7Wto/xSf vvdN+9y8+PvadhFg4Q3t5jLrlAlBJiG9OSCkxGgF80ThhdtKWCShhQXD/ZEVfbJd Nr5zDwzBPRkAHPKz+IYCkvlpJI+ihXAVZBcVMyB8FGHGstRxWUgZpGXJWMc8Qs+e TYiR0CRS/IqLld2LQKjtzE5OOi9e5uG4lfsi3gk8scgps4cI2CvVTV3iTuQ7T98z 7wqM9R/HtJuqAT/rEK0hzIfNalXRxISGj1ZLbYfcP8nJD0frKA0L/jddZH7zt+ZG WFj7ZoPxtdhpmeb+Jpv70AoRmJYM42YX+X3+WU+HcPYWpkccjHNlHs0bV9EYjgFQ ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:E44YW4ucNmoMNtJTF2qyWaAq4WguAO9u9gWX_Jbw1xelgsHUjsn4Eg>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:E44YWxx2tOWUJqvtttGiAR2wXOK5Jx0QaiTzy0S0f3WpEG9j4Ncr8Q>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:E44YW2h7wijx4TolBHs8ZFIgJowB-2cFQrxwL65ofUL60BKULuRvmg>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:E44YW9CaIeLNROjBhfFSXgGLwEKUNIQMxu60mcXEvkVaX-zUKjDD3g>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:E44YW7vAbsW65L21z-6XP7z83b4_yIAVSGcwry9SMKKNnfKiKm1rGQ>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:E44YW26G7zn96biLo0H1ZKsBC0zebdJUrCMgdJ1wNQnO-UiN5i7Crg>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:E44YW6nCkFD-X_AIIGaF5jbYeu3aNEEO2tUaPZsNF41ZNz-_kA1aTg>
Received: from [10.84.146.44] (mobile-166-170-31-82.mycingular.net [166.170.31.82]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 612AA102B8; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 21:44:51 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15E302)
In-Reply-To: <0717d625-cf68-e9eb-4100-2da080d410ed@labn.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 21:44:49 -0400
Cc: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, gen-art@ietf.org, teas@ietf.org, draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo.all@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <547A8182-73C6-40C3-A6FE-06D430708342@cooperw.in>
References: <152658832204.7577.3384283921850968264@ietfa.amsl.com> <0717d625-cf68-e9eb-4100-2da080d410ed@labn.net>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/kojzscrNk2AO6aB2kN4bhVLfC7U>
Subject: Re: [Teas] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-15
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Thu, 07 Jun 2018 01:44:56 -0000

Russ, thanks for your review. Lou, thanks for the updates. I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa

> On Jun 5, 2018, at 10:03 AM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Russ,
> 
>     Thanks for the comments. Please take a look at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-16 and let us know if this version does *not* address your issues.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou
> 
> (doc Shepherd)
> 
> 
>> On 5/17/2018 4:18 PM, Russ Housley wrote:
>> Reviewer: Russ Housley
>> Review result: Not Ready
>> 
>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>> like any other last call comments.
>> 
>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>> 
>> Document: draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-15
>> Reviewer: Russ Housley
>> Review Date: 2018-05-17
>> IETF LC End Date: 2018-05-30
>> IESG Telechat date: 2018-06-07
>> 
>> Summary:  Not Ready
>> 
>> Major Concerns:
>> 
>> See https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines.  The
>> Security Considerations section MUST follow the template provided on
>> that web page, but it is not followed by this document.
>> 
>> Note that [RFC5246], [RFC6241], [RFC6242], [RFC6536], and [RFC8040]
>> are required to be normative references by those guidelines.  None of
>> these appear in the references.
>> 
>> 
>> Minor Concerns:
>> 
>> Section 1.1: Please update the first paragraph to reference RFC 8174
>> in addition to RFC 2119, as follows:
>> 
>>    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 1.1: Please add a reference to RFC 7926.
>> 
>> 
>> Nits:
>> 
>> Please pick one spelling (YANG vs. Yang) and use it throughout the
>> document.
>> 
>> The TOC contains several lines where the heading goes past the column
>> of page numbers.  Reformatting would make this much easier to read.
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art