Skip to main content

Early Review of draft-ietf-netconf-over-quic-04
review-ietf-netconf-over-quic-04-opsdir-early-liu-2025-07-11-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-netconf-over-quic
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Early Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2025-07-02
Requested 2025-06-11
Requested by Kent Watsen
Authors Jinyou Dai , Shaohua Yu , Weiqiang Cheng , Marc Blanchet , Per Andersson
I-D last updated 2026-08-10 (Latest revision 2026-08-10)
Completed reviews Tsvart Early review of -04 by Martin Duke (diff)
Yangdoctors Early review of -04 by Jürgen Schönwälder (diff)
Opsdir Early review of -04 by Will (Shucheng) LIU (diff)
Comments
The document is about to enter WGLC.
Assignment Reviewer Will (Shucheng) LIU
State Completed
Request Early review on draft-ietf-netconf-over-quic by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/J02DckYtkZYjPUHCG7l2R3xQrfQ
Reviewed revision 04 (document currently at 10)
Result Has nits
Completed 2025-07-11
review-ietf-netconf-over-quic-04-opsdir-early-liu-2025-07-11-00
I have reviewed draft-ietf-netconf-over-quic-04 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 the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last
call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and
WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

   “This document specifies how to use QUIC as a secure transport for
   exchanging Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) messages.  QUIC
   provides encryption properties similar to TLS, while eliminating TCP
   head-of-line blocking issues and also providing more loss detection
   and congestion control than UDP.  NETCONF over QUIC has privacy
   properties similar to NETCONF over TLS.”

My overall view of the document is 'Has Nits' for publication.

** Technical **

- The mapping of single or multiple NETCONF sessions to QUIC connections lacks
sufficient clarity in the current text. It is recommended that Sections 3 and 4
be revised to elaborate on this point, thereby preventing potential
ambiguities. - Given that the document aims to propose QUIC as a secure
transport protocol, the Security Considerations section, particularly in
relation to NETCONF over TLS, warrants more detailed exposition. -
Additionally, it is observed that the inclusion of a YANG Module in the
document is not mentioned in the Abstract or Introduction. It is advisable to
emphasize this relevant information early in the draft. - Further, details
regarding the current implementation status and the tangible advantages over
TCP would be valuable additions, and it is suggested that such content be
incorporated into the draft.

** Editorial **

No.