Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-07
review-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-07-opsdir-telechat-clarke-2018-01-06-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 11)
Type Telechat Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2018-01-23
Requested 2017-12-27
Authors Ladislav Lhotka , Acee Lindem , Yingzhen Qu
Draft last updated 2018-01-06
Completed reviews Yangdoctors Early review of -05 by Martin Björklund (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -10 by Carl Wallace (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -06 by Francis Dupont (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -07 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Rtgdir Telechat review of -08 by He Jia (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Joe Clarke
State Completed
Review review-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-07-opsdir-telechat-clarke-2018-01-06
Reviewed revision 07 (document currently at 11)
Result Ready
Completed 2018-01-06
review-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-07-opsdir-telechat-clarke-2018-01-06-00
I am completing this review as a representative of the ops directorate.  This
document describes an NMDA-compliant version of the ietf-routing family of YANG
modules that obsoletes the revisions in RFC8022.  Overall, I feel this document
is ready, with some very minor spelling nits.

The only substantive comment I have is in the comments ahead of the
now-obsolete state branches.  Currently, these comments just state "Obsolete
State Data".  I wonder if it would make sense to add a bit more text here to
reference why these branches are now obsolete.  Perhaps a reference to the NMDA
document would be beneficial.

Spelling-wise, search for Managment.  There are four instances in the YANG
modules themselves.  Obviously, these should be "Management".

Another minor nit I noticed (and this is likely an issue with pyang) is that
when using a grouping, the YANG tree lists nodes like routing-state ->
router-id with a '+' instead of a 'o' (i.e., indicating obsolete).  Not a big
deal since the parent container is obsolete.

One comment I have is that the imports clauses here definitely point out a need
to be able to import by some kind of version that will allow to set a minimum
requirement (e.g., import by semantic version).  Having comments such as are in
the modules now are not machine-consumable, and will likely cause operational
challenges for those that do not pay attention.