IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis-15
review-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis-15-opsdir-lc-chen-2025-06-26-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 15) | |
Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
Deadline | 2025-06-23 | |
Requested | 2025-06-13 | |
Requested by | Mohamed Boucadair | |
Authors | Sergio Belotti , Italo Busi , Dieter Beller , Esther Le Rouzic , Aihua Guo | |
I-D last updated | 2025-07-10 (Latest revision 2025-06-17) | |
Completed reviews |
Yangdoctors IETF Last Call review of -04
by Joe Clarke
(diff)
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -11 by Gyan Mishra (diff) Yangdoctors Early review of -13 by Joe Clarke (diff) Genart IETF Last Call review of -15 by Thomas Fossati Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -15 by Ran Chen |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Ran Chen |
State | Completed | |
Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/nnl6nywb00EyYpHk_WuWMzX_TyI | |
Reviewed revision | 15 | |
Result | Has nits | |
Completed | 2025-06-26 |
review-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis-15-opsdir-lc-chen-2025-06-26-00
I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational Directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed during the last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments like any other last call comments. This document obsoletes [RFC9093] by replacing it in its entirety. It provides a new revision of the YANG module contained in that RFC, and retains the data types previously defined, but also adds new type(ietf-layer0-types )definitions to the YANG module. The document is clear and well-written. The motivation is described well. The document is almost ready for publication. ## Minor 1.For Normative References: Please pay more attention to draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update-17, which has not yet entered the IESG process. 2. The following text points to non-existent sections. [I-D.ietf-ccamp-optical-impairment-topology-yang] does not contain Section 2.5.2. Was "Section 2.6.2 of [I-D.ietf-ccamp-optical-impairment-topology-yang] perhaps intended as shown below Current: Section 2.5.2 of [I-D.ietf-ccamp-optical-impairment-topology-yang] Perhaps: Section 2.6.2 of [I-D.ietf-ccamp-optical-impairment-topology-yang] ## NITS: - s/decending/descending/ Thanks for your contribution! Best Regards, Ran Chen