Telechat Review of draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-09
review-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-09-genart-telechat-carpenter-2017-10-13-00

Gen-ART *Last Call* review of draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-09

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-09.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2017-10-14
IETF LC End Date: 2017-10-25
IESG Telechat date: 2017-10-26

Summary: Ready with issues
--------

Comment:
--------

The shepherd says:

> This includes at least two different implementations of
> the model, as well as product and demos at Bits-n-Bytes.

Shouldn't WGs make routine use of BCP 205, RFC 7942 "Improving
Awareness of Running Code: The Implementation Status Section"?

Minor Issues:
-------------

In the following:

         |  +--ro min-delay-value?         uint32
         |  +--ro max-delay-value?         uint32
         |  +--ro average-delay-value?     uint32
         +--ro session-jitter-statistics
         |  +--ro time-resolution-value?   identityref
         |  +--ro min-jitter-value?        uint32
         |  +--ro max-jitter-value?        uint32
         |  +--ro average-jitter-value?    uint32

what are the units for the delay-value and jitter-value
elements, and what definition of 'jitter' is intended?


  identity protocol-id-internet {
    base protocol-id;
    description
      "Internet Protocols.";
  }

It isn't clear what "Internet Protocols" means. It seems totally non-specific.

Nits:
-----

  identity protocol-id-propreitary {
    base protocol-id;
    description
      "Propreitary protocol (eg.,IP SLA).";

s/propreitary/proprietary/
s/Propreitary/Proprietary/