Thanks Kent for valuable review, see reply inline below. 发件人: Kent Watsen [mailto:[email protected]] 发送时间: 2019年11月1日 23:24 收件人: [email protected] 抄送: [email protected] 主题: Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-05.txt
I have reviewed -05 and support it so long as the following comments are considered: Kent // contributor ==== review ==== Section 1 is missing a NMDA-compliance statement, per https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8407#section-3.5. [Qin]: Will add, thanks. Section 2 says: Factory-default content SHALL be specified by one of the following means in descending order of precedence 1. For the <running>,<candidate> and <startup> datastores as the content of the <factory-default> datastore, if it exists; The (1) sentence doesn't flow from the sentence before. Maybe you mean something like: 1. Network management protocol (e.g., NETCONF, RESTCONF) operations may be used to access the contents of <factory-default>. [Qin]:it means Factory-default content may be specified by <factory-default>datastore, if it exists. I will make this clear in the text. Thanks. Section 2 says: For the server supporting zero touch bootstrapping mechanisms, the factory default configuration causes the bootstrapping process to execute,e.g.,the server might reset configuration to device's factory default configuration,for the version of operating system software it is running. s/the server might reset /the server resets / [Qin]:Accepted Section 2 says: In addition,the "factory-reset" RPC might also be used to trigger some other restoring and resetting tasks such as files cleanup, restarting the node or some of the software processes, setting some security data/passwords to the default value, removing logs, or removing any temporary data (from datastore or elsewhere), etc. s/the "factory-reset" RPC might /the "factory-reset" RPC MAY / ??? [Qin]:Fixed. Section 3 says: this document introduces a new datastore resource named 'Factory-Default' ... 'Factory-Default' should not be capitalized. [Qin]:Okay. Section 3 says: The contents of the datastore can be read using NETCONF, RESTCONF <get-data> and <get-config> operations. Which doesn't make sense. Perhaps: The contents of the datastore can be read using NETCONF <get-data> and <get-config> operations, and the RESTCONF protocol equivalents. [Qin]:Agree with your proposed change, thanks. Section 3 says: The operation <factory- reset> can be used to copy the factory default content to a set of read-write configuration datastores and then the content of these datastores is propagated automatically to any other read only datastores, e.g., <intended> and <operational>. This is confusing. I think what you want to say is The operation <factory- reset> copies the factory default content to <running> and, if present, <startup>. [Qin]:Fixed as you suggested. Section 4 says: import ietf-netconf { prefix nc ; } import ietf-datastores { prefix ds; } These statements are missing "reference" statements. [Qin]: I prefer to add a paragraph at the beginning of section 4 to discuss which references are used And which typedef is imported. Section 4 says: description "The read-only datastore contains the configuration that will be copied into e.g., the running datastore by the factory-reset operation if the target is the running datastore."; which excludes <startup> and confusingly mentions a "target" when the RPC itself has no parameters. Perhaps: description "The read-only datastore contains the configuration that will be copied into <running> and, if present, <startup>."; [Qin]:Good point, fixed. Section 5. Please make the registrations have single-spaced lines. [Qin]:Okay. Section 6. The last paragraph doesn't make a point. Perhaps conclude with something like: "This module does not itself set "nacm:default-deny-write" on the 'factory-reset' RPC, leaving it to applications to configure the access control settings." [Qin]:Based on Andy’s proposal, we should add "nacm:default-deny-write" on the 'factory-reset' RPC, I will see how to tweak the text. Appendix B should have a note to the RFC Stream Editor to remove it when the draft is published. [Qin]:okay. Kent On Nov 1, 2019, at 11:21 AM, Kent Watsen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: This begins a two-week Working Group Last Call (WGLC) on draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-05. The WGLC ends on Nov 15 (two days before the NETMOD 106 session). Please send your comments to the working group mailing list. Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome! This is useful and important, even from authors. Objections, concerns, and suggestions are also welcomed at this time. Thank you, NETMOD Chairs
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
