----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Wilton" <[email protected]>
To: "tom petch" <[email protected]>; "Mach Chen"
<[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
<[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2018 12:06 PM
>
> On 02/08/2018 11:46, tom petch wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mach Chen" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2018 2:58 AM
> >
> >> Hi Rob,
> >>
> >> Looks good to me!
> > Well it would if we were allowed to have [References] in the
Abstract
> > which we are not allowed to have:-)
> OK, I can remove those. But the NMDA one I copied verbatim from the
> abstract in RFC 8343 ;-)

Um, no.  Let me try again.  RFC8343 has

  The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network
  Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) defined in RFC 8342.

which is fine.

For this I-D, you propose

>>>     The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network
>>>     Management Datastore Architecture defined in [RFC8342].

and it is the [ ] that I see as a problem.  Abstracts, like YANG
Modules, must be plain text so that they can exist independently of an
RFC which means that XML/HTML type anchors are not allowed, and I read
the [ ] as reflecting an underlying anchor, which needs changing to
plain text.

Tom Petch

> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> >> Best regards,
> >> Mach
> >>
> >> From: Robert Wilton [mailto:[email protected]]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2018 11:37 PM
> >> To: Mach Chen <[email protected]>;
> > [email protected]; [email protected]
> >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> >>
> >> Hi Mach,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the comments, we will address all of these.
> >>
> >> Specifically for the abstract, I propose changing the text to:
> >>
> >> "
> >>
> >>     This document defines a YANG data model for the management of
the
> >>
> >>     Address Resolution Protocol (ARP).  It extends the basic ARP
> >>
> >>     functionality contained in the ietf-ip YANG data model, defined
in
> >>
> >>     [RFC8344], to provide management of optional ARP features and
> >>
> >>     statistics.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network
> >>
> >>     Management Datastore Architecture defined in [RFC8342].
> >>
> >> "
> >> Thanks,
> >> Rob
> >>
> >> On 01/08/2018 09:48, Mach Chen wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of
> > this draft.
> >> ​ https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ding-rtgwg-arp-yang-model-02
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The routing directorate will, on request from the working group
chair,
> > perform an “early” review of a draft before it is submitted for
> > publication to the IESG. The early review can be performed at any
time
> > during the draft’s lifetime as a working group document. The purpose
of
> > the early review depends on the stage that the document has reached.
As
> > this document is in working group last call, my focus for the review
was
> > to determine whether the document is ready to be published. Please
> > consider my comments along with the other working group last call
> > comments.
> >>
> >>
> >> For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
> > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
> >>
> >>
> >> Document: draft-ding-rtgwg-arp-yang-model-02
> >>
> >>   Reviewer: Mach Chen
> >>
> >>   Review Date: 01 August 2018
> >>
> >>   Intended Status: Standards Track
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Summary
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The draft  defines a YANG model for ARP configurations, which
covers
> > static ARP, ARP caching, proxy ARP and gratuitous ARP. The model is
very
> > short and the content is straightforward. It can be a reasonable
start
> > point for WG adoption call.
> >>
> >>
> >> General comments:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Although I am not a native English speaker, I also feel that the
> > document needs some enhancements on its wording and grammar to make
it
> > more clean and readable.
> >>
> >>
> >> For example,  the following text needs some rewording or may be
> > removed.
> >> Abstract:
> >>
> >> "The data model performs as
> >>
> >>     a guideline for configuring ARP capabilities on a system.  It
is
> >>
> >>     intended this model be used by service providers who manipulate
> >>
> >>     devices from different vendors in a standard way."
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Specific comments:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 1. It's lack of the IANA section.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2. Section 3.1 and Section 3.3,  suggest to add relevant references
to
> > ARP caching and gratuitous ARP.
> >>
> >>
> >> 3.  import ietf-interfaces {
> >>
> >>      prefix if;
> >>
> >>      description
> >>
> >>        "A Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)
> >>
> >>         compatible version of the ietf-interfaces module
> >>
> >>         is required.";
> >>
> >>    }
> >>
> >>    import ietf-ip {
> >>
> >>      prefix ip;
> >>
> >>      description
> >>
> >>        "A Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)
> >>
> >>         compatible version of the ietf-ip module is
> >>
> >>         required.";
> >>
> >>    }
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Lack of the reference RFCs.
> >>
> >> And the descriptions seem not appropriate, some of other
descriptions
> > in this document have the similar issue, suggest to revise those
> > descriptions.
> >>
> >>
> >> In addition, idnits tool shows:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> == Missing Reference: 'RFC826' is mentioned on line 77, but not
> > defined
> >>
> >>
> >>    == Missing Reference: 'RFC6536' is mentioned on line 583, but
not
> > defined
> >>
> >>
> >>    ** Obsolete undefined reference: RFC 6536 (Obsoleted by RFC
8341)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>    == Unused Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis' is defined on
line
> > 606,
> >>       but no explicit reference was found in the text
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>    == Unused Reference: 'RFC0826' is defined on line 636, but no
> > explicit
> >>       reference was found in the text
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> Mach
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> > --------
> >
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rtgwg mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
> >>
>

_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to