Last Call Review of draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-23
review-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-23-rtgdir-lc-singh-2019-04-16-00

Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special
request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs.
For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
​http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would
be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call
comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by
updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications
Reviewer: Ravi Singh
Review Date: 04/12/2019
IETF LC End Date: date-if-known
Intended Status: Standards Track

Summary:
This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be
considered prior to publication.

Comments:
I've reviewed the draft.
It is very exhaustive and generally well written.
I consider it ready for publication, after the following "nits" have been
addressed.

1.       1.3:
"Support for configured subscriptions is optional, with its availability
advertised via a  YANG feature." The "how" aspect should be alluded to here,
even though subsequent sections address this in detail? This will make for
better readability.

2.       "For connectionless or stateless transports like
      HTTP, a lack of receipt acknowledgment of a sequential set of
      notification messages and/or keep-alives can be used to trigger a
      termination of a dynamic subscription."
How long to wait? Any inputs the draft would like to provide or leave to an
implementation?

3.       Section 2.4.2:
Would be useful to explain "when replay stops", if "replay" was requested.
Is this done by mandating that "stop-time" must be provided if replay was
requested? Subsequent sections address this, however would be useful to allude
to in this section…

4.       Section 2.4.3:
Please elaborate on the presence of the following in the schema:
             +---w stop-time?
                     yang:date-and-time

5.        Section 2.4.5: not clear when this would actually get used, IOW…what
would cause there to be such a situation where the kill-sbuscription
notifcation would need to be used. When will a subscription not be associated
with a transport session?

6.       2.4.6:
a.       why have errors w.r.t. "weighting", and "dependency" not been included?
b.      Numered points 1/2/3 are better communicated via a table to avoid the
duplicated text. Brevity makes for better reading.

7.       Sections 2.5.2 - 2.5.7: these are a bit of a drag to read through, in
an already large document. Readability for these sections would be greatly
improved if the notifications that get sent out were listed pictorially or in a
tabular fashion by enhancing the simple FSMs listed in section 2.5.1.

8.       Section 5.4:
"This can be accomplish by establishing" -> "This can be accomplished by
establishing"

Regards
Ravi