Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-04
Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Thu, 22 February 2018 08:37 UTC
Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C90712E865; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 00:37:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 kVkf3UwuEbcr; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 00:37:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E3DC12D777; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 00:37:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.45]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5BE4E1AE02EF; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 09:37:56 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 09:37:55 +0100
Message-Id: <20180222.093755.1782379121016763204.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de
Cc: rrahman@cisco.com, yang-doctors@ietf.org, draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis.all@ietf.org, netconf@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180221161807.kibmsqxqfve2ua5e@elstar.local>
References: <151908304889.29703.12041362091923250865@ietfa.amsl.com> <20180221161807.kibmsqxqfve2ua5e@elstar.local>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/216YO9jGrhTASMQt5f9LwJDmCc8>
Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-04
X-BeenThere: yang-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email list of the yang-doctors directorate <yang-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/yang-doctors>, <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/yang-doctors/>
List-Post: <mailto:yang-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors>, <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 08:38:00 -0000
Hi, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > Reshad, > > thanks for your review. Comments inline... > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 03:30:48PM -0800, Reshad Rahman wrote: [...] > > - grouping implementation-parameters should be renamed > > module-implementation-parameters? > > This name change may make sense. I agree. > > - The groupings defined are used only once. For > > yang-library-parameters I see why this is done since it can be > > reused. But for others such as implementation-parameters, I don’t > > see why a grouping is needed. Maybe this is just authors’ preference > > to regroup information. > > I am not sure which modules would be using these groupings and whether > it is necessary to provide these groupings. I know that some versions > of schema mount used some of the groupings but this may not be > necessary anymore with the new library structure. I assume Martin > knows more details about which groupings may be useful to provide for > possible reuse reasons. The addition of these groupings was requested by someone in the WG b/c they wanted to be able to build some "module-related" data structures w/o the implementation details, IIRC. > > - Description of leaf module in list deviation: by > > “self-referential” I assume that this means that the reference can > > not refer to the ietf-yang-library module? While this may seem > > obvious I believe it’d be good to spell it out. > > No, the intention was to say that a module should not list itself as a > deviation module, neither directly or indirectly. I guess we have to > describe this better. Perhaps something along these lines: > > description > "A module that deviates the module associated with this > entry. This reference MUST NOT (directly or indirectly) > refer to the module being deviated. > > Clients, MUST make sure that they handle a situation > where a module deviates itself (directly or indirectly) > gracefully."; But if the first paragraph says that servers MUST NOT do X, why should we say that clients MUST handle not(X)? I think we should use your new first paragraph and remove the second. /martin
- [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review of dr… Reshad Rahman
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review o… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review o… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review o… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review o… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review o… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review o… Martin Bjorklund