Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-04

Request Review of draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2016-02-16
Requested 2016-02-03
Authors Kent Watsen , Thomas Nadeau
I-D last updated 2016-02-13
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -04 by Christer Holmberg
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Tero Kivinen
Opsdir Last Call review of -04 by Al Morton
Assignment Reviewer Al Morton
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs by Ops Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 04
Result Has issues
Completed 2016-02-13
Hi Kent and Tom, and ops-dir,

It's time for your OPS-DIR review and I'm "it".
As Warren always says, "Be not afraid...".

I fully support the purpose of your draft. These are
important concepts to define unambiguously and 
some useful requirements to see implemented.
I'll make a few suggestions for clarification below,
and I trust you'll develop acceptable wording
where I haven't fully understood your intentions.

I'm not aware of any IPR associated with the points
I seek to clarify.


Section 2

   Asynchronous Configuration Operation:  A configuration request to
       update the running configuration of a server that is applied
       asynchronously with respect to the client request.

"running configuration" is used in this definition, and again in 
Synchronous Configuration Operation without being defined.
Is this a subset of the "Operational State" ?

Section 3  Requirements

"   1.  Ability to interact with both intended and applied configuration "

What entity is this requirement for?  Is it:
    1. The Client MUST possess the ability to interact with both...
or BOTH Client and Server?

Later in Section 3

"   3.  Separation of the applied configuration and derived state aspects
       of operational state; ability to retrieve them independently and

       A.  Be able to retrieve only the applied configuration aspects of
           operational state

       B.  Be able to retrieve only the derived state aspects of
           operational state

       C.  Be able to retrieve both the applied configuration and
           derived state aspects of operational state together"

This seems to be a set of requirements for BOTH the Client and the Server,
worded from the Point-of-view of the Client ("retrieve").
Can you add the Client and Server here, using RFC 2119 terms?

     The Client MUST:
       A.  Be able to retrieve only the applied configuration aspects of...

Later in Section 3

"   4.  Ability to relate configuration with its corresponding
       operational state
      A. ... "

These are Server requirements? One or both the entities gets MUST or SHOULD...
(These requirements (4) were not completely clear to me.)