Hi,
On 26.09.18 23:20, Alissa Cooper wrote: > > For avoidance of confusion, I would suggest replacing "l2," "l3," and "l4" > with > "layer2," "layer3," and "layer4," respectively. In the context of what is being modeled, there really is no confusion. If necessary, I would prefer just an annotation that L2, L3, L4 refer to layer 2, layer 3, and layer 4, respectively. Thanks, Eliot > > s/Definitions of action for this ace entry/Definitions of action for this ACE > entry/ > > s/Specifies the forwarding action per ace entry/Specifies the forwarding > action > per ACE entry/ > > Sec 4.2: > > "This module imports definitions from Common YANG Data Types [RFC6991] > and references IP [RFC0791], ICMP [RFC0792], Definition of the > Differentiated Services Field in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers [RFC2474], > The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP > [RFC3168], , IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture [RFC4007], IPv6 > Addressing Architecture [RFC4291], A Recommendation for IPv6 Address > Text Representation [RFC5952], IPv6 [RFC8200]." > > It looks like something is missing from this list, possibly RFC 793. > > Sec 5: > > In this section or elsewhere it would be nice to see a sentence noting that > this YANG model allows the configuration of packet logging, which if used > would > additionally warrant protections against unauthorized log access and a logs > retention policy. > > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
