YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering (TE) Topologies

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 20 and is now closed.

Deborah Brungard Yes

Alissa Cooper No Objection

Roman Danyliw No Objection

Comment (2019-06-11 for -21)
(1) Section 4.2.  Per “The data model proposed in this document can be used to retrieve/represent/manipulate the customized TE Topology depicted in Figure 8b” this statement struck me as odd because aren’t all of the topologies depicted here supported with the modeling language?

(2) Section 4.2.  Per “Although an authorized client MAY receive a TE topology with the client ID field   matching some other client”, why would this happen?  Couldn’t this potentially leak customized TE information across clients?

(3) Section 5.9.  Per “When two or more templates specify values for the same configuration field, the value from the template with the highest priority is used”, is the highest priority 0 or 65535 (since priority is a uint16)?  The text doesn’t indicate whether the highest priority is a largest or smallest number.

(4) Editorial Nits
-- Section 3.4.  Missing word.  s/3.3/Section 3.3/

-- Section 4.2.  Typo.  s/-connectivit-/-connectivity-/

-- Section 4.2.  Editorial.  Why does “single-abstract-node-with-connectivit –matrix topology” use hyphens and “border_nodes_connected_via_mesh_of_abstract_links topology” use an underscore?

-- Section 4.2.  Typo.  s/Although a/Although an/

-- Section 5.6.  Typo.  s/cooresponding/corresponding/

(Suresh Krishnan) No Objection

Warren Kumari No Objection

Comment (2019-06-12 for -21)
I had the weirdest sense of deja-vu when reading this (on a plane, while jet-lagged) -- and then noticed that it was a returning item :-P

(Mirja Kühlewind) No Objection

Barry Leiba No Objection

Alvaro Retana No Objection

(Adam Roach) No Objection

Martin Vigoureux No Objection

Éric Vyncke No Objection

Comment (2019-06-10 for -21)
Thank you all for the work put into this document and the advanced ASCII-art pieces.

I have only a small nit (feel free to ignore).

== NITS ==

-- Section 3 --

I would suggest to expand TTP and LTP before using them in Figure 1 even if they are defined later in the text (I appreciate that space is limited on the picture). 

Related to this, in section 6, TTP and LTP are expanded again ;-)

Magnus Westerlund No Objection