Subject: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-device-model-02

From: Jonathan Hardwick <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 02:32:38 -0700

Reviewer: Daniele Ceccarelli
Review result: Has Nits

Hello,
 
I’ve been selected as the QA reviewer for
draft-ietf-rtgwg-device-model-02.
 
I believe the draft is well written and quite easy to understand, I
just have some minor suggestion that might be help improving the
readability (mostly for non subject experts).
 
-	Title: the title is not very clear, while the abstract explains very
well in the first sentence what the goal of the draft is, what about
changing it into: “A logical organization for network device YANG
models” ?
-	Introduction: You are referencing an individual draft. This could be
a block for the draft, but most of all does it make sense to have two
separate drafts (in two different WGs), one to say the value of
organizing YANG models  and the other one defining a logical
organization for the models? (maybe too late for such change)
-	Introduction: this sentence is a bit confusing: 
“  This document refers to two new modules that are expected to be 
implemented.  These models are defined to support the configuration 
and operation of network-devices that allow for the partitioning of 
resources from both, or either, management and networking  
perspectives.  Two forms of resource partitioning are referenced:”
                Maybe a modules/models mismatch? You start saying that
the doc refers to two MODULES, then you say that MODELS are defined
and the list two FORMS OF RESOURCE PARTITIONING.
-	Intro: “    Should structural-mount/YSDL not be available, the more
explicit tree structure presented in earlier versions of this document
will need to  be utilized.” If it was described in previous versions
of the document it is no longer available, or ?
-	Scope: as I got it while reading and as it is confirmed in the
draft, the scope is “limited”  to physical and virtual switches and
routers and not devices operating at the lower layers. Since you say
“we consider network devices that support protocols  and functions
defined within the IETF Routing Area” I would expect it to cover also
lower layer devices. 
-	Section 2: Section 2 and its subsection are very clear and explain
well the concepts but it is not clear where the list comes from. It
partially overlaps with the “overall structure” example above but at
least having all of them in the overall structure plus some others
(provided as example and not analyzed in the details with dedicated
subsection ) would help.
 
BR
Daniele