Last Call Review of draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-17
review-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-17-tsvart-lc-eddy-2019-04-02-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 22)
Type Last Call Review
Team Transport Area Review Team (tsvart)
Deadline 2019-04-12
Requested 2019-03-22
Authors Eric Voit, Alexander Clemm, Alberto Prieto, Einar Nilsen-Nygaard, Ambika Tripathy
Draft last updated 2019-04-02
Completed reviews Yangdoctors Last Call review of -16 by Reshad Rahman (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -17 by David Mandelberg (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -17 by Wesley Eddy (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -17 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -17 by Dhruv Dhody (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Wesley Eddy
State Completed
Review review-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-17-tsvart-lc-eddy-2019-04-02
Reviewed rev. 17 (document currently at 22)
Review result Ready with Issues
Review completed: 2019-04-02

Review
review-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-17-tsvart-lc-eddy-2019-04-02

This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
discussion list for information.

When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.

I reviewed this in conjunction with the set of related WG documents on NETCONF/RESTCONF subscriptions and event notifications.  I also have some comments on other documents in the set, some of which may influence this once, since they are closely related.

In figure 3, and text on page 11, there is an example with a DiffServ codepoint value of "10".  This could be interpreted as binary, decimal, hexadecimal, etc.  It should be clear what the base is supposed to be.  It seemed pretty ambiguous in this and the related documents, so it's not apparent that an implementer would be sure to get it right or for it to be compatible.

I have other broad comments on the DSCP usage that will be in review comments for the subscribed-notifications draft where it is more appropriate.