Telechat Review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04
review-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04-genart-telechat-carpenter-2019-10-19-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-10-29
Requested 2019-10-15
Authors Andy Bierman, Martin Björklund, Kent Watsen
Draft last updated 2019-10-19
Completed reviews Genart Telechat review of -04 by Brian Carpenter
Assignment Reviewer Brian Carpenter
State Completed
Review review-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04-genart-telechat-carpenter-2019-10-19
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/xqaZ7n1j55Uwxsfu0t5O0ujjhPo
Reviewed rev. 04
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2019-10-19

Review
review-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04-genart-telechat-carpenter-2019-10-19

Gen-ART Last Call & telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2019-10-20
IETF LC End Date: TBD
IESG Telechat date: 2019-10-31

Summary: Ready with nits
--------

Comments: 
---------

This was accidentally put on the IESG agenda without an IETF Last Call,
so this review serves both purposes.

The draft seems very clear and I have no technical comments.

Nits:
-----

> Updates: 8340 (if approved)
> Intended status: Standards Track

RFC 8340 is a BCP, so can this really be Standards Track?
Shouldn't it also be BCP, extending BCP 215? It's tricky,
because it also effectively extends RFC 8040, which is
Standards Track rather than BCP. Sadly it doesn't seem that
a document can be both BCP and Standards Track.

Also, this draft says:

>   The "yang-data" extension from [RFC8040] has been copied here,
>   renamed to "structure", and updated to be more flexible.

That reads as if RFC 8040 is also updated, and it leaves the
status of "yang-data" unclear. Is it now deprecated? Perhaps the
sentence would be clearer like this:

  This document defines a new YANG extension statement called
  "structure", which is similar to but more flexible than the
  "yang-data" extension from [RFC8040].