Last Call Review of draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-07
review-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-07-secdir-lc-wallace-2024-06-04-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 12)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2024-06-04
Requested 2024-05-21
Requested by Jim Guichard
Authors Yingzhen Qu , Acee Lindem , Stephane Litkowski , Jeff Tantsura
I-D last updated 2025-01-10 (Latest revision 2024-07-05)
Completed reviews Genart IETF Last Call review of -05 by Paul Kyzivat (diff)
Yangdoctors IETF Last Call review of -05 by Jan Lindblad (diff)
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -07 by Dhruv Dhody (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -07 by Carl Wallace (diff)
Yangdoctors Early review of -02 by Jan Lindblad (diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -04 by Susan Hares (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Carl Wallace
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/TYAHASkAcGPUjpz4LttyIIYrl6c
Reviewed revision 07 (document currently at 12)
Result Ready
Completed 2024-06-04
review-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-07-secdir-lc-wallace-2024-06-04-00
This document defines two YANG modules to define support for MPLS Maximum SID
Depths (MSDs). One module contains definitions for the MSD types defined in the
IANA IGP MSD-Types registry. The other augments YANG modules from several other
RFCs. I am not a YANG expert and made no attempt to verify the YANG modules.
The draft appears to be in good shape overall. The security considerations seem
appropriate to me. A couple of editorial nits are below.

In the second paragraph of the introduction, "IANA the IGP MSD-Types registry"
should probably be "IANA IGP MSD-Types registry." The last paragraph of the
security considerations is unnecessarily indented.