Subject: [mpls] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-yang-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 18:16:34 -0800

Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-yang-07: 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/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-mpls-ldp-yang/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[This is a preliminary Discuss placed before a full document review is complete,
to give the authors additional time to consider and respond]

The YANG doctor last call review of the -06 notes that these modules are in
violation of the expectations of RFC 8349 (at least w.r.t. defining a new identity for
the control-plane protocol and probably also w.r.t. augmenting the
"control-plane-protocol" under "/routing").  This document should either be brought
into compliance or explain why it diverges.

The YANG doctor's comments about the default values for the "local" graceful-restart configuration
causing the global configuration to never take effect also should be addressed.

The YANG doctor also noted that the "md5-key" leaf does not specify its semantics, and
is presumably sensitive (so that a crypto-type would be more appropriate).

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

Please also respond to the other YANG doctor, rtg-dir, and other directorate reviewers' comments.

I support Roman's Discuss.