Early Review of draft-ietf-netconf-udp-notif-21
review-ietf-netconf-udp-notif-21-opsdir-early-tsou-2025-06-02-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-netconf-udp-notif |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 25) | |
| Type | Early Review | |
| Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
| Deadline | 2025-04-29 | |
| Requested | 2025-04-08 | |
| Requested by | Per Andersson | |
| Authors | Alex Huang Feng , Pierre Francois , Tianran Zhou , Thomas Graf , Paolo Lucente | |
| I-D last updated | 2026-01-28 (Latest revision 2026-01-28) | |
| Completed reviews |
Tsvart Early review of -11
by Michael Tüxen
(diff)
Yangdoctors Early review of -20 by Jürgen Schönwälder (diff) Opsdir Early review of -21 by Tina Tsou (diff) Tsvart Early review of -23 by Michael Tüxen (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Tina Tsou |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Early review on draft-ietf-netconf-udp-notif by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/oHeNQoiDONERWj_AQFbDXOkZGUY | |
| Reviewed revision | 21 (document currently at 25) | |
| Result | Has issues | |
| Completed | 2025-06-02 |
review-ietf-netconf-udp-notif-21-opsdir-early-tsou-2025-06-02-00
Editorial Typos: There are a few minor errors. For example, Section 4 spells “IANA regsitry” instead of “registry”. The Abstract has “Such a design enable” (should be enables). These should be corrected. Placeholder References: The YANG module import statements use placeholder “RFC YYYY” and “RFC ZZZZ” for upcoming documents. These must be updated once the referenced drafts become RFCs. In particular, the ietf-subscribed-notif-receivers module import (to configure on publisher) cites an “HTTPS-based Transport” draft that should be finalized or dropped if obsolete. Segmentation Flag Semantics: The enable-segmentation leaf defaults to true (good), but its description warns that disabling it causes IP fragmentation. Given fragmentation is strongly discouraged (RFC 8085/8900), the text should more emphatically recommend not disabling segmentation. The current wording (“large messages may be fragmented”) could be interpreted loosely; it might help to note this is generally unsafe.