Hello Tom, Thank you for the additional details! I updated the security considerations and the link [1] can still be used for the diff between version -01 of the draft and our current version. If there are no new comments in the next few days, I intend to submit a new revision of the draft.
Best regards, Ivaylo [1]: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-core-yang-library&url2=http://core-wg.github.io/yang-cbor/draft-ietf-core-yang-library-latest.txt. On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 10:47 AM tom petch <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Ivaylo Petrov <[email protected]> > Sent: 08 April 2020 13:06 > Hello Tom, > > Thank you for your review and your comments! They were indeed very > helpful. I will try to spend some more time making sure we follow the > recommendations from RFC8407, but for now please find my answers below > (prefixed with [IP]). Note that the diff after handing your comments can be > found at [1] for the txt file diff and [2] for the raw Markdown diff. > > <TP> > I like your initials! > > On Security, no, RFC8407 requires you to use the boilerplate from the > wiki; except that you cannot since you must reference CORECONF but I think > that you must use the boiler plate with minimal change ie just adding the > reference to CORECONF. The Security in RFC7895 is out of date, no RESTCONF. > > Otherwise, looks ok and I will look again when a new I-D appears - I do > like the plain text I-D format as a way of working:-) > > tom petch > > Best regards, > Ivaylo > > [1]: > https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-core-yang-library&url2=http://core-wg.github.io/yang-cbor/draft-ietf-core-yang-library-latest.txt > [2]: > https://github.com/core-wg/yang-cbor/commit/2aa29f2468c827fd4b58cad6a5decba795d9c767 > > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 12:11 PM tom petch <[email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]>> wrote: > There is quite a lot wrong with the admin of the YANG-library I-D when > compared with RFC8407 IMHO > > Security considerations does not conform to boiler plate > > [IP]: Adding the following text in the beginning of the security > considerations will make it follow the same structure as RFC7895. Would > that be acceptable for you? > > The YANG module defined in this memo is designed to be accessed via > CORECONF > {{-comi}}, NETCONF {{RFC6241}} or RESTCONF {{RFC8040}}. Depending on the > used > protocol, the security considerations of some or all of those will apply. > > IANA considerations does not register name space > > [IP]: I added such registration. Please let me know if it looks fine. The > relevant text is: > > ## YANG Namespace Registration > > This document registers the following XML namespace URN in the "IETF XML > Registry", following the format defined in {{RFC3688}}: > > URI: please assign > urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-constrained-yang-library > > Registrant Contact: The IESG. > > XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace. > > RFC 6991 is imported and so MUST be a Normative reference > > [IP]: Fixed > > ietf-sid-file is imported and so MUST be a Normative not Informative > reference for the I-D > > [IP]: Fixed > > reference ietf-core-sid would be better as RFC YYYY with an RFC Editor > note asking them to replace YYYY with the number assigned to 'YANG Schema > ... > > [IP]: Fixed > > Organization Netconf WG seems an odd choice and contradicts contact details > > [IP]: Changed to CoRE WG > > Contact does not normally specify WG Chairs > > > [IP]: I removed the chairs and left only the group and the editors. Is > that what you had in mind? > > more than one revision clause > > [IP]: Fixed > > CORECONF not an abbreviation I recognise > > [IP]: We have received other comments related to this. We will discuss > them during the meeting today and try to clarify this. > > I will look some more as and when these are addressed (or I see IETF Last > Call:-) > > Tom Petch > ________________________________________ > From: netmod <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on > behalf of Carsten Bormann <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: 09 March 2020 13:04 > To: core > Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [netmod] π WG Last Call of CORECONF drafts: > draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-12, -sid-11, -comi-09, -yang-library-01 > > It took us a long time to get the four CORECONF drafts in sync, > but now we are ready for WGLC. > > This starts a working group last call for > β draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-12 > β draft-ietf-core-sid-11 > β draft-ietf-core-comi-09 > β draft-ietf-core-yang-library-01 > > ending on > > 24:00 UTC on Tuesday, March 31, 2020. > > (This includes some extra time for the IETF week and for cross-WG > coordination.) > > This WGLC is copied to the netmod WG mailing list; please do have a look > at these drafts as they are slated to become a part of the greater > YANG/NETCONF/RESTCONF family. We intend the discussion to be on the > CoRE mailing list, but if you find a fundamental issue with YANG or > RESTCONF, feel free to discuss that on netmod instead. > > Please start a new email thread for each major issue that will need > discussion and make sure the subject line includes the draft name and > some sort of name for the issue. (Minor issues such as typos can also > be sent to the authors.) > > If you read the draft and think it looks fine, please send a one line > email to the list or to the chairs letting us know that so we can get > a feel of how broad the review has been. > > (To reviewers and authors:) If you are aware of any patent claims that > might apply to systems that implement these drafts, please review BCP 78 > and BCP 79 and make any appropriate IPR declaration before the last-call > ends. If you are not sure whether you need to make a declaration or not, > please talk to the chairs and we will help. > > GrΓΌΓe, Carsten > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > _______________________________________________ > core mailing list > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
