Hello, This is our reply to Lar's Eggert's comments. The original comments can be read at https://datatracker.ietf.org/iesg/agenda/documents/#draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format_lars-eggert. Thanks for the review. I used most of your suggestions to improve the draft. See detailed replies as "BALAZS:" below. Regards Balazs
========================================================================================= All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you did with these suggestions. Section 3.2. , paragraph 4, nit: > ance data; the instance data itself is is contained only in the > 'content-data > ^^^^^ Possible typo: you repeated a word. BALAZS: Will be corrected. Section 3.2. , paragraph 5, nit: > ove if the module gets changed // in anyway during reviews or RFC editor > proc > ^^^^^^^^^ Did you mean "in any way"? BALAZS: Yes, will be corrected. Section 3.2. , paragraph 19, nit: > data file needs to be handled in a secure way as mentioned below. The secur > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Consider replacing this phrase with the adverb "securely" to avoid wordiness. BALAZS: Will be corrected. Section 5.2. , paragraph 1, nit: > v08 - v09 * Removed reference to similar to get reply * Introduced artwork > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Typo. Did you mean "too similar to"? BALAZS: Earlier the format was described as similar to the response of aNETCONF get operation. Updated it to make it more understandable. These URLs in the document did not return content: * https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/netmodf/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
