On 24/01/2020 01:27, zhang.zheng@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi Tom,
Thank you very much for your review!
Please review the newest 12 version.
You do not seem to have responded to some of my comments.
Yes, the augment is now in the right place but ..
the description says that it is only valid MSDP but there is no 'when'
statement to enforce this.
On the other hand, identity now appears but is conditional; this would
seem to me to make it of limited value - I do not see that conditional
in other YANG modules.
Features need YANG reference clauses IMHO and I like a list in the body
of the I-D as well
The RFC number is not something you insert. The RFC Editor allocates
and inserts it. Although it is the convention to use XXXX as a
placeholder, I think it helpful to include a note up front asking them
to replace XXXX with the assigned number (many I-Ds have references to
more than one I-D so it is helpful to be explicit about what is XXXX and
what is YYYY although that is not an issue here)
tcp-connection-source is still testing for IPv4 configured, not as the
description says enabled
I note too that you have six authors; the limit is normally five unless
this has been agreed by the AD.
Tom Petch
Thank you very much! :-)
Best regards,
Sandy
原始邮件
发件人：tompetch <ietfid@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
收件人：IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx>;last-call@xxxxxxxx <last-call@xxxxxxxx>;
抄送人：pim-chairs@xxxxxxxx <pim-chairs@xxxxxxxx>;pim@xxxxxxxx <pim@xxxxxxxx>;draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang@xxxxxxxx <draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang@xxxxxxxx>;
日 期 ：2020年01月23日 00:21
主 题 ：Re: [pim] Last Call: <draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang-08.txt> (A YANG DataModel for Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP)) to Proposed Standard
RFC8349 says that a new identity MUST be defined for a new control plane protocol - I see no such definition here
RFC8349 says that augments should be to control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol as is seen in the OSPF and the other LSR YANG modules; here I see an augment to control-plane-protocols which seems wrong to me
many features but no idea where to look them up - I think every YANG feature needs a YANG reference to an I-D/RFC
I find a list of features and references in the body of an I-D valuable
YANG modules must be plain text; [3618] in the module description does not look like plain text. Other references e.g. RFC8177 look ok although some have a space in them and some do not
leaf tcp-connection-source says that ipv4 must be enabled but the when statement does not test for enabled, just for configured
rpc clear peer clears everything if there is no address - this is fail danger, a specific value for clear all would IMHO be better engineering
XXXX is likely to mean this I-D/RFC but I always like to see a specific direction to the RFC Editor to that effect, just the once, somewhere near the front.
In the same vein, a direction to replace the dates with date of publication would not go amiss
Tom Petch
________________________________________
From: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce-bounces@xxxxxxxx> on behalf of The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: 15 January 2020 20:29
To: IETF-Announce
Cc: draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang@xxxxxxxx; pim-chairs@xxxxxxxx; pim@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang-08.txt> (A YANG Data Model for Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP)) to Proposed Standard
The IESG has received a request from the Protocols for IP Multicast WG (pim)
to consider the following document: - 'A YANG Data Model for Multicast Source
Discovery Protocol (MSDP)'
<draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang-08.txt> as 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
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2020-01-30. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model for the configuration and
management of Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP) Protocol.
The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang/ballot/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
pim@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
