Re: [i2rs] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt

2020-06-24 Thread Susan Hares
Med: 

I did report the issue in the write-up, and the Tools people said they were 
working on it. 

Sue 

-Original Message-
From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com [mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 2:14 PM
To: Stig Venaas; 
Cc: rtg-...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology@ietf.org; 
i2rs@ietf.org
Subject: RE: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt

Hi Stig, 

Thank you for the review. These nits will be fixed in the next iteration. 

As per this comment: 

"There may be some minor model issues, tracker says: Yang Validation 9 errors, 
2 warnings." 

Actually, this is an issue of the IETF datatracker that only populates in 
IETF-defined modules. In particular, IEEE-related modules are not populated in 
as revealed by the error message:

==
ietf-l2-topol...@2019-10-15.yang:31: error: module "ieee802-dot1q-types" not 
found in search path ==

Unless I'm mistaken, Sue has reported this issue in the write-up. Will look 
further on the warnings, though. 

Cheers,
Med

> -Message d'origine-
> De : Stig Venaas [mailto:s...@venaas.com] Envoyé : mercredi 24 juin 
> 2020 19:07 À :  Cc : rtg-...@ietf.org; 
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network- topology@ietf.org; i2rs@ietf.org 
> Objet : RtgDir review: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this 
> draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or 
> routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG 
> review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is 
> to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about 
> the Routing Directorate, please see 
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
> 
> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, 
> it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other 
> IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them 
> through discussion or by updating the draft.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt
> Reviewer: Stig Venaas
> Review Date: 2020-06-24
> IETF LC End Date: 2020-06-25
> Intended Status: Standards Track
> 
> Summary:
> This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that 
> should be considered prior to publication.
> 
> Comments:
> The document is well written and easy to read. I only found some minor 
> nits that should be taken care of.
> 
> Major Issues:
> No major issues found.
> 
> Minor Issues:
> No minor issues found.
> 
> Nits:
> 
> The idnits tool found some nits; regarding references in particular.
> 
> There may be some minor model issues, tracker says: Yang Validation 9 
> errors, 2 warnings.
> 
> The abstract is rather short, I think it would be worth going into a 
> little more detail.
> 
> In Introduction “A sample example” should maybe just be “An example”?
> 
> For grouping l2-network-type, shouldn’t “indicates” be capitalized?
>   presence "indicates L2 Network";
> 
> For leaf maximum-frame-size, missing space before PPP
>   if L2 frame is other type (e.g.,PPP), the L2
> 
> For l2-termination-point-type, leaf tag, should say “is supported”
>   "Defines whether lag is support or not.";
> 
> In the security considerations, should be “defines”
>   The Layer 2 topology module define
> 
> In Appendix A, should say “represents”.
>   implementations, a corresponding companion module is defined that
>   represent the operational state of layer 2 network topologies.  
> The
> 
> Regards,
> Stig

_

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites 
ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez 
le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les 
messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute 
responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used 
or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.


___
i2rs mailing list
i2rs@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs


Re: [i2rs] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt

2020-06-24 Thread mohamed.boucadair
Hi Stig, 

Thank you for the review. These nits will be fixed in the next iteration. 

As per this comment: 

"There may be some minor model issues, tracker says: Yang Validation 9 errors, 
2 warnings." 

Actually, this is an issue of the IETF datatracker that only populates in 
IETF-defined modules. In particular, IEEE-related modules are not populated in 
as revealed by the error message:

==
ietf-l2-topol...@2019-10-15.yang:31: error: module "ieee802-dot1q-types" not 
found in search path
==

Unless I'm mistaken, Sue has reported this issue in the write-up. Will look 
further on the warnings, though. 

Cheers,
Med

> -Message d'origine-
> De : Stig Venaas [mailto:s...@venaas.com]
> Envoyé : mercredi 24 juin 2020 19:07
> À : 
> Cc : rtg-...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-
> topology@ietf.org; i2rs@ietf.org
> Objet : RtgDir review: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this
> draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or
> routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG
> review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is
> to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about
> the Routing Directorate, please see
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
> 
> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs,
> it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other
> IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them
> through discussion or by updating the draft.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt
> Reviewer: Stig Venaas
> Review Date: 2020-06-24
> IETF LC End Date: 2020-06-25
> Intended Status: Standards Track
> 
> Summary:
> This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
> should be considered prior to publication.
> 
> Comments:
> The document is well written and easy to read. I only found some minor
> nits that should be taken care of.
> 
> Major Issues:
> No major issues found.
> 
> Minor Issues:
> No minor issues found.
> 
> Nits:
> 
> The idnits tool found some nits; regarding references in particular.
> 
> There may be some minor model issues, tracker says: Yang Validation 9
> errors, 2 warnings.
> 
> The abstract is rather short, I think it would be worth going into a
> little more detail.
> 
> In Introduction “A sample example” should maybe just be “An example”?
> 
> For grouping l2-network-type, shouldn’t “indicates” be capitalized?
>   presence "indicates L2 Network";
> 
> For leaf maximum-frame-size, missing space before PPP
>   if L2 frame is other type (e.g.,PPP), the L2
> 
> For l2-termination-point-type, leaf tag, should say “is supported”
>   "Defines whether lag is support or not.";
> 
> In the security considerations, should be “defines”
>   The Layer 2 topology module define
> 
> In Appendix A, should say “represents”.
>   implementations, a corresponding companion module is defined that
>   represent the operational state of layer 2 network topologies.  The
> 
> Regards,
> Stig

_

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

___
i2rs mailing list
i2rs@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs


[i2rs] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt

2020-06-24 Thread Stig Venaas
Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this
draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or
routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG
review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is
to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about
the Routing Directorate, please see
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs,
it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other
IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them
through discussion or by updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-13.txt
Reviewer: Stig Venaas
Review Date: 2020-06-24
IETF LC End Date: 2020-06-25
Intended Status: Standards Track

Summary:
This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
should be considered prior to publication.

Comments:
The document is well written and easy to read. I only found some minor
nits that should be taken care of.

Major Issues:
No major issues found.

Minor Issues:
No minor issues found.

Nits:

The idnits tool found some nits; regarding references in particular.

There may be some minor model issues, tracker says: Yang Validation 9
errors, 2 warnings.

The abstract is rather short, I think it would be worth going into a
little more detail.

In Introduction “A sample example” should maybe just be “An example”?

For grouping l2-network-type, shouldn’t “indicates” be capitalized?
  presence "indicates L2 Network";

For leaf maximum-frame-size, missing space before PPP
  if L2 frame is other type (e.g.,PPP), the L2

For l2-termination-point-type, leaf tag, should say “is supported”
  "Defines whether lag is support or not.";

In the security considerations, should be “defines”
  The Layer 2 topology module define

In Appendix A, should say “represents”.
  implementations, a corresponding companion module is defined that
  represent the operational state of layer 2 network topologies.  The

Regards,
Stig

___
i2rs mailing list
i2rs@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs