Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-15
review-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-15-genart-lc-housley-2018-05-17-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 22)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2018-05-30
Requested 2018-05-16
Authors Xufeng Liu , Igor Bryskin , Vishnu Pavan Beeram , Tarek Saad , Himanshu C. Shah , Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
I-D last updated 2018-05-17
Completed reviews Yangdoctors Last Call review of -08 by Mahesh Jethanandani (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -15 by Melinda Shore (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -15 by Russ Housley (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -20 by Russ Housley (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -20 by Melinda Shore (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Russ Housley
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 15 (document currently at 22)
Result Not ready
Completed 2018-05-17
review-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-15-genart-lc-housley-2018-05-17-00
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 treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

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

Document: draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-15
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2018-05-17
IETF LC End Date: 2018-05-30
IESG Telechat date: 2018-06-07

Summary:  Not Ready

Major Concerns:

See https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines.  The
Security Considerations section MUST follow the template provided on
that web page, but it is not followed by this document.

Note that [RFC5246], [RFC6241], [RFC6242], [RFC6536], and [RFC8040]
are required to be normative references by those guidelines.  None of
these appear in the references.


Minor Concerns:

Section 1.1: Please update the first paragraph to reference RFC 8174
in addition to RFC 2119, as follows: 

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

Section 1.1: Please add a reference to RFC 7926.


Nits:

Please pick one spelling (YANG vs. Yang) and use it throughout the
document.

The TOC contains several lines where the heading goes past the column
of page numbers.  Reformatting would make this much easier to read.