Last Call Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-08
review-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-06-yangdoctors-lc-lindem-2019-06-22-01

Request Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 29)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team YANG Doctors (yangdoctors)
Deadline 2019-06-28
Requested 2019-06-06
Requested by Linda Dunbar
Authors Jinyong Tim Kim , Jaehoon Paul Jeong , Park Jung-Soo , Susan Hares , Qiushi Lin
I-D last updated 2025-09-29 (Latest revision 2022-06-01)
Completed reviews Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -16 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Yangdoctors IETF Last Call review of -08 by Acee Lindem (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -17 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -16 by Kyle Rose (diff)
Tsvart IETF Last Call review of -16 by Yoshifumi Nishida (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -21 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -21 by Jean-Michel Combes (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -21 by Alexey Melnikov (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Acee Lindem
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm by YANG Doctors Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/AzaK5Pz9vlz8rAZAnz443JFjdWs
Reviewed revision 08 (document currently at 29)
Result Ready
Completed 2019-11-25
review-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-06-yangdoctors-lc-lindem-2019-06-22-01
I see you chose not to harmonize with the existing ACL model (RFC 8519) or the
updated YANG types (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-02). However, given the
applicability of the draft, perhaps it doesn’t really matter.  In any event, I
marked the review as “Ready”. However, it a better characterization would
probably be "Ready as Ever".