Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ospf-yang-23
review-ietf-ospf-yang-23-yangdoctors-lc-lhotka-2019-07-23-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-ospf-yang |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 29) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | YANG Doctors (yangdoctors) | |
Deadline | 2019-07-17 | |
Requested | 2019-07-02 | |
Requested by | Alvaro Retana | |
Authors | Derek M. Yeung , Yingzhen Qu , Zhaohui (Jeffrey) Zhang , Ing-Wher (Helen) Chen , Acee Lindem | |
I-D last updated | 2019-07-23 | |
Completed reviews |
Yangdoctors Last Call review of -09
by Ladislav Lhotka
(diff)
Yangdoctors Last Call review of -23 by Ladislav Lhotka (diff) Rtgdir Last Call review of -23 by Ravi Singh (diff) Genart Last Call review of -23 by Erik Kline (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -23 by Stefan Santesson (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Ladislav Lhotka |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-ospf-yang by YANG Doctors Assigned | |
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/0CKg1cqWrMnk6y7J0LTvLFZkPv8 | |
Reviewed revision | 23 (document currently at 29) | |
Result | Ready w/nits | |
Completed | 2019-07-23 |
review-ietf-ospf-yang-23-yangdoctors-lc-lhotka-2019-07-23-00
I reviewed already revision 09 of this module [1]. All substantial objections and suggestions expressed in that review are addressed in revision 23 and I am satisfied with the result. I especially appreciate that descriptions were considerably expanded and references added in many places. I tested validity of the ietf-ospf module with pyang and Yangson tools, and found no issues. The comments below are non-substantial and do not affect practical use of the module. In summary, I think this YANG module and document is a remarkable piece of work demonstrating that it is possible to build quite complex vendor-neutral data model that can be used equally well with several router plaforms. Comments: - names of locally-defined identities as parameters of XPath functions derived-from and derived-from-or-self sometimes have the 'ospf:' prefix, sometimes don't. I suggest to be consistent, and the option without a prefix looks better to me. - RFC 8407 suggests this format of references to RFC: RFC XXXX: Title of the Document This draft uses a hyphen instead of a colon. I suggest to follow the 8407 convention so as to make parsing easier. - the title of Sec. 2.8 should be "OSPF Notifications" (plural and capitalization) - enumerations "nssa-translator-state-type" and "restart-status-type" define the value parameter for two of their enums but not for the third. This should be avoided. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-ospf-yang-09-yangdoctors-lc-lhotka-2017-12-06/