Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 15:49:26 +0100

Hi Murray,

First of all, many thanks for your review and my apologies that it’s taken so long for me to
reply.

Please see inline below.

Thanks,
Ian

> On 15. Dec 2021, at 07:57, Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24: Discuss
> 
> 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/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This should be easy to resolve, but we have to ask as it's pretty important:
> 
> Question 7 of the shepherd writeup, about the authors and BCP 78/79, appears
> not to have been answered.  Were these declarations made?
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I suggest breaking Section 6 into two subsections, one for each batch of
> registry operations.

[if - done]

> 
> A possibly ignorant question about YANG modules: Since RFCs 3319 and 8987 are
> referenced from within the module itself, shouldn't they be normative
> references?

[if - RFC3319 is only referenced as it is used by an example module showing how
Additional DHCPv6 options can be modelled and augmented. As this is in the appendices, I think
It’s right to be informative.

RFC8987 does need to be implemented by the relay and is referenced in the ietf-dhcpv6-relay
Module, so this is now a normative reference.]

> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg