Since Mehmet and I recently took over as WG chairs I am now the
document shepherd. But the document writeup was already
done/prepared by one of the earlier WG chairs. So I am
submitting my review comments as IETF Last Call Comments.
- sect 2.2.1
I asume that <eventTime> is of type dateTime!!??
Would be good to state so.
- on page 14 I see:
<rpc message-id="101"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<get>
<filter type="subtree">
<netconf xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netmod:notification">
<streams/>
<netconf>
</filter>
</get>
</rpc>
Should "netmod" be changed into "netconf" !!??
Actaully, I wonder if the line
<netconf xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netmod:notification">
should be
<netconf xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0">
instead?
Same question on page 15.
Mmm... I see it in the Schema on page 17/18 as well. So maybe it is OK.
Or is this an accidental inheritance from NETMOD efforts? Is there a good
reason to make it netmod and not netconf?
- Page 29/30
The above fictional notification definition could result in the
following is a sample notification list, which is used in the
examples in this section.
On 2nd line s/is a// >>
- IN IANA COnsiderations, I guess that instead of
Following the format in RFC 3688, IANA has made the following
registration.
We should have stated:
Following the format in RFC 3688, IANA is requested to make the
following registration.
Oh well... that is what we intended to write ;-)
- I wonder how/why
[XML Schema]
Fallside, D. and P. Walmsley, "XML Schema Part 0: Primer
Second Edition", W3C XML Schema, October 2004.
would/could be a normative reference. It is a "primer", so some
sort of education/tutorial on XML Schema, no?
I doubt that that should be normative.
But I think the issue is that the reference is not so well described.
I think they mean to point to:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/
Which states:
XML Schema Part 0: Primer Second Edition
W3C Recommendation 28 October 2004
So then it is a W3C recomendation, and then it may make sense as normative
ref.
I think I would make the reference as follows:
[XML Schema]
Fallside, D. and P. Walmsley, "XML Schema Part 0: Primer
Second Edition", W3C Recommendation, 28 October 2004
<http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/>
- I guess we should instruct the RFC-Editor to remove Appendix A
(Change log) right before publication as RFC.
Bert Wijnen
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: The IESG [mailto:iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx]
> Verzonden: dinsdag 15 januari 2008 22:59
> Aan: IETF-Announce
> CC: netconf@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Onderwerp: Last Call: draft-ietf-netconf-notification (NETCONF Event
> Notifications) to Proposed Standard
>
>
> The IESG has received a request from the Network Configuration WG
> (netconf) to consider the following document:
>
> - 'NETCONF Event Notifications '
> <draft-ietf-netconf-notification-11.txt> as a Proposed Standard
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2008-01-29. Exceptionally,
> comments may be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please
> retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
> The file can be obtained via
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netconf-notification-11.txt
>
>
>
>
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id
> &dTag=14141&rfc_flag=0
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf