Re: [yang-doctors] YD review and yang-push and friends

Kent Watsen <> Tue, 13 March 2018 01:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E14E712778E for <>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DiMDXkZD5tjN for <>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A797412708C for <>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd ( []) by ( with SMTP id w2D1ruvv031648; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:58:04 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=BKTnvUdCjIdyiw36HueFrrLd6LqD6STknWBG+Z2OZ2g=; b=PI9WboVuoHEqOk3c7sdgIesC2g4g0zzWJe0G7Mv9KqEQDbz2nRG+jHuhx/aqzeKg9YS1 Ms9jyOvrs9Jaa5it2uhc6mdiR0nigwuzYTGuF15Zl7Wyh57SWLDjo0sqHoEUbIucyU1x rg9csxrX75ZhklD/Eor0eoyx5kNVspf4dZGCai6WiYeO5Gtj/HqS6+Jre0ZmdORti0rG pPJ+C+quAEjIiWQqZO1AZ5Zwpt8PeeLvxISm8XE2mhGKDleJX1RctDD6/pi9HH46VpS3 //MWCaKSFmJyrQZU4V/WhFkxlsAuLnhxbaWx5v1kdbZzQ1cX5xIbDocyt8C6vV968bMA dw==
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTP id 2gp426g4bg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:58:04 -0700
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.588.7; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 01:58:02 +0000
Received: from ([fe80::d13e:bdcf:3798:c34f]) by ([fe80::d13e:bdcf:3798:c34f%2]) with mapi id 15.20.0588.013; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 01:58:02 +0000
From: Kent Watsen <>
To: Mehmet Ersue <>, 'Martin Bjorklund' <>
CC: "" <>
Thread-Topic: [yang-doctors] YD review and yang-push and friends
Thread-Index: AQHTtoeDudrccbytYUG/6H8xwaQd9KPF+PwAgAB5qID//8zPAIACAkGAgATrngA=
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 01:58:02 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <019e01d3b6ef$dabf85a0$903e90e0$> <> <045201d3b7d7$62c2c6a0$284853e0$>
In-Reply-To: <045201d3b7d7$62c2c6a0$284853e0$>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.20.0.170309
x-originating-ip: []
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM5PR05MB3211; 7:PdMCz4caw1gcFIHneLlaAv9+CI9+aTS5iqzT6k1bpjQ9wr+0B+n7ny/o/HYMeUtoXFQECfh7CcxkaPtZeRYfUzJ+D0M1coHvSJlnR7PtGG/RWIGP89izhd+Qm9YtMASREGmcdk6+uDoHm6KmuhXX0dPwISvyxOVgcvoycJVfbmvvFXk4ghdr7ZHwF3hNoO3Exi7XhrjMRD7xZiF+l2KDciJ5VXqKLz0eWuN/gWlxwDgNoWjYvPiqWzTkWDTXqo+x
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ec83627c-b10a-41be-7ac3-08d58885daec
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(48565401081)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3211;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR05MB3211:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(120809045254105)(138986009662008)(85827821059158);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(8211001083)(6040522)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046)(3231221)(944501244)(52105095)(93006095)(93001095)(6055026)(6041310)(20161123558120)(20161123562045)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3211; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3211;
x-forefront-prvs: 0610D16BBE
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39380400002)(376002)(39860400002)(346002)(366004)(396003)(189003)(199004)(13464003)(53936002)(6116002)(6436002)(6486002)(99286004)(6512007)(6306002)(966005)(39060400002)(316002)(6246003)(4326008)(478600001)(25786009)(5660300001)(3846002)(83716003)(5250100002)(186003)(68736007)(3660700001)(76176011)(86362001)(93886005)(36756003)(8936002)(7736002)(305945005)(26005)(81156014)(81166006)(8676002)(97736004)(102836004)(59450400001)(14454004)(53546011)(6506007)(33656002)(106356001)(66066001)(82746002)(229853002)(2906002)(2950100002)(110136005)(58126008)(2900100001)(105586002)(3280700002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3211;; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: SzeV8NWbGTwcPt0GVYcLob5uh0GOd9o467sqfyUpovuh8XxQdGcEgH3W8pFFI9k8nF621eF1Myr02BpMHneFnPwxcj9Kxv4CBfardx/pM107ieh3tHS+sSOqwJIvuroys+mfEf8ZgPZil2MUdKqqhqcgUIToxMIKxt2Nm/gWilrIYG1Eb3ObPlbbTuVlxkiz4EHP5s7ZmOgjTVJxeDj2W4jiBOodf5s66mE6IYyj6y3VF7vPPTAH23CFLmDXFl2ygs/CPt49yFWsvtTuALmPs4xHQ0Yk+vLVF+m6AHqnNa+8LKj7xDd/tihaCAbwKkQxwaRUD48Myrz2dpIavksDSg==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ec83627c-b10a-41be-7ac3-08d58885daec
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Mar 2018 01:58:02.6551 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR05MB3211
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-03-12_14:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1803130023
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] YD review and yang-push and friends
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email list of the yang-doctors directorate <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 01:58:09 -0000

Now that the YD page has been restored, here's what it says:


What to look for during a review

The most important item is to give the AD a sense of how important it is that they pay attention to the document. 
For YANG reviews the YANG Doctors will apply the RFC6087bis document on the Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of YANG Data Model Documents ​ The YANG language syntax and semantics should be analyzed. The compliance with ​Network Management Datastore Architecture should to be ensured (see also ​NMDA guidelines).

Review Information

Under some circumstances, the YANG doctors might discover open issues or provide feedback worth documenting for the larger community. While the NETMOD WG still work on RFC6087bis, updating this document is preferred. If the topic is not appropriate for the RFC6087bis or if RFC6087bis has already been published, then this must be documented on the YANG questions/answers WIKI


The scope of the YD's review is unclear. 


===== original message =====

One question coming up in my mind is against which criteria should such drafts be reviewed.
A YANG module has its review criteria defined in YANG RFCs.
However examples may be manifold and imperfect.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kent Watsen <>
> Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 6:09 PM
> To: Mehmet Ersue <>; 'Martin Bjorklund' <mbj@tail-
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] YD review and yang-push and friends
> > I did not start review for netconf-event-notifications-08.
> >
> > Netconf co-chairs: Please clarify whether a review is required.
> What's in a YANG Doctor review?  Is it just syntax, or semantics too?
> If it includes semantics, then does that then entail needing to read the draft
> text as well, to determine if the YANG module expresses the correct
> semantics or find that the draft text is wrong?  Would it also extend to
> reviewing the examples in the draft, to further ensure that the semantics are
> understood correctly or, possibly, that there is an error in the example?
> Yes, I am aware that netconf-event-notifications does not define a YANG
> module, but it does have examples that for the YANG modules in the yang-
> push and subscriber-notifications drafts.  In that sense, I'm wondering if they
> need to be reviewed, or do we expect the YD reviewers of those other two
> drafts to look at this draft already?
> FWIW, I not talking about what might be found via validation.  I've already
> asked the authors to post a script that validates the 14 examples in this
> draft...
> K.