IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-netconf-yang-library-augmentedby-14
review-ietf-netconf-yang-library-augmentedby-14-secdir-lc-salz-2026-01-15-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-netconf-yang-library-augmentedby
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 18)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2026-01-26
Requested 2026-01-12
Authors Zhuoyao Lin , Benoît Claise , Ignacio Dominguez Martinez-Casanueva
I-D last updated 2026-08-13 (Latest revision 2026-03-20)
Completed reviews Yangdoctors Early review of -07 by Andy Bierman (diff)
Opsdir Early review of -08 by Sheng Jiang (diff)
Yangdoctors IETF Last Call review of -13 by Andy Bierman (diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -13 by Xiao Min (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -14 by Rich Salz (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -15 by Rich Salz (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Rich Salz
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-netconf-yang-library-augmentedby by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/PD1XvxKszxURwNu09RS09Siio3c
Reviewed revision 14 (document currently at 18)
Result Has nits
Completed 2026-01-15
review-ietf-netconf-yang-library-augmentedby-14-secdir-lc-salz-2026-01-15-00
Sec 1, para 2. "augment" and "deviations" should be in italics; let the RPC
deal with that. Sec 1, para 4. You must be very proud of that sentence :) Sec
1, para 5. "require now" --> "are now required" or, better, "MUST now be"

Sec 1.2, why single quotes on NDMA? And it *is* the title, not *defined as the*
title.

Sec 2, the motivation is clear.

Sec 3, I like the details of how this solved real problems/complications.

Sec 4.2.1, you could delete the first sentence given the title says the same
thing.

Sec 4.2.2, not sure why we see CODE BEGIN/CODE ENDS markers, leave for the RPC
to fix. Would like to see a blank space between the modules in the code
fragment.

Sec 7. "There are no writable" seems redundant given the next sentence. I would
not split the paragraph at "Specifically, the following ..."