Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend-17
review-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend-17-yangdoctors-lc-bjorklund-2023-05-04-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend-14
Requested revision 14 (document currently at 24)
Type Last Call Review
Team YANG Doctors (yangdoctors)
Deadline 2023-05-01
Requested 2023-04-17
Requested by Jim Guichard
Authors Acee Lindem , Yingzhen Qu
I-D last updated 2023-05-04
Completed reviews Yangdoctors Last Call review of -17 by Martin Björklund (diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -16 by Zhaohui (Jeffrey) Zhang (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -16 by Chris M. Lonvick (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -21 by Bo Wu (diff)
Yangdoctors Last Call review of -03 by Christian Hopps (diff)
Yangdoctors Last Call review of -06 by Martin Björklund (diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -06 by Emmanuel Baccelli (diff)
Comments
This has been reviewed quite a while ago on v-06 so i would like to get a final review as part of the IETF last-call for this document. Thank You!
Assignment Reviewer Martin Björklund
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend by YANG Doctors Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/0NAG_nu-SdUCKPMRzIwii9ZJhFA
Reviewed revision 17 (document currently at 24)
Result Ready
Completed 2023-05-04
review-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend-17-yangdoctors-lc-bjorklund-2023-05-04-00
This is the third YANG doctor review of this document (I have reviewed -17).
All comments from my previous review have been addressed.

So, I have only two very minor comments.

o  The "description" of the YANG module now reads:

     This document defines a YANG data model which extends
     the RIBs defined in ietf-routing YANG module with more
     route attributes.

   In the module itself, we usually write "This YANG module ...".  So perhaps simply

     This YANG module extends the RIBs defined in the 'ietf-routing' YANG module
     with more route attributes.

o  Use single quotes to refer to schema nodes.

   The "description" of the leaf "routes" has:

     "Total routes for protocol in the RIB.";

   This looks odd, the grammar is not correct.  Then I realized that the word "protocol" refers
   to the leaf "protocol".  So I suggest:

      "Total routes for 'protocol' in the RIB.";

   The same comment applies to some other descriptions as well.



/martin