Subject: Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-07

From: Joe Clarke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2018 12:30:45 -0800

Reviewer: Joe Clarke
Review result: Ready

I am completing this review as a representative of the ops directorate.  This
document describes an NMDA-compliant version of the ietf-routing family of YANG
modules that obsoletes the revisions in RFC8022.  Overall, I feel this document
is ready, with some very minor spelling nits.

The only substantive comment I have is in the comments ahead of the
now-obsolete state branches.  Currently, these comments just state "Obsolete
State Data".  I wonder if it would make sense to add a bit more text here to
reference why these branches are now obsolete.  Perhaps a reference to the NMDA
document would be beneficial.

Spelling-wise, search for Managment.  There are four instances in the YANG
modules themselves.  Obviously, these should be "Management".

Another minor nit I noticed (and this is likely an issue with pyang) is that
when using a grouping, the YANG tree lists nodes like routing-state ->
router-id with a '+' instead of a 'o' (i.e., indicating obsolete).  Not a big
deal since the parent container is obsolete.

One comment I have is that the imports clauses here definitely point out a need
to be able to import by some kind of version that will allow to set a minimum
requirement (e.g., import by semantic version).  Having comments such as are in
the modules now are not machine-consumable, and will likely cause operational
challenges for those that do not pay attention.

---

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 23:27:24 +0000

Hey Joe, 

Thanks for the review. See replies inline.

>document would be beneficial.

How about something like:

  The subsequent data nodes are obviated and obsoleted by the “Network
  Management Architecture” as described in
draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores.”

>modules themselves.  Obviously, these should be "Management".

Sigh - thanks, I’ve fixed.
>deal since the parent container is obsolete.

Good catch. Due to some subsetting and formatting, these were not
regenerated. I
will fix. 
>challenges for those that do not pay attention.

We discussed this on the NETMOD list and it is also undesirable to hard
code a 
version. It would be good to have “greater than or equal to” semantics.

Thanks,
Acee

---

From: Joe Clarke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 10:03:27 -0500

> draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores.”

Works for me.

> Good catch. Due to some subsetting and formatting, these were not

Cool.  I wasn't in a place to validate with pyang yesterday.  I had
assumed an issue there, but if it just takes a regen to fix, that would
be great and clearer.

> version. It would be good to have “greater than or equal to” semantics.

Yes, I have seen and been part of the semver discussion.  This was more
to get keep beating the drum as this will pose an operational issue for
those not as familiar with NMDA.

Thanks, Acee.

Joe