Subject: [babel] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-information-model-11: (with COMMENT)

From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 01:55:18 -0800

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-babel-information-model-11: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-information-model/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for the work put into this document.

Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points, and some nits.

I also second Alvaro's question about the source-routing component.

I hope that this helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric
== COMMENTS ==

I have a slight concern that draft-ietf-babel-yang-model is not reviewed at the
same time as the information model but, at least, they will be reviewed in the
right order ;-)

-- Section 3 --
For an informational document, I wonder whether the use of normative "MAY" is
required.

-- Section 3.2 --
About the UDP port, should the Babel default be part of the information model
description ? I would prefer to leave it to the protocol specifications. Same
remark applies to other objects/properties when the Babel default value is
repeated in the information model. What is the usefulness of repeating it ?

== NITS ==

-- Section 2 --
It is probably a matter of taste ;-) but I do not like too much the fact that
all the objects names start with "babel-" as it is implicit.