Authors,
While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) the
following questions, which are also in the XML file.
1) <!-- [rfced] Please note that the title of the document has been updated
to expand abbreviations per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style
Guide"). Please let us know if you prefer otherwise.
Original:
YANG Data Model for Maximum SID Depth Types and MPLS Maximum SID Depth
Current:
YANG Data Model for Maximum Segment Identifier (SID) Depth Types
and MPLS Maximum SID Depth
-->
2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in
the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. -->
3) <!--[rfced] We note that two RFCs in the reference clauses in the
iana-msd-types module do not appear in the reference section of the RFC.
May a sentence be added before the YANG module stating that it refers to
the following RFCs? For example:
This module references [RFC8476], [RFC8491], [RFC8662], [RFC8664],
[RFC8814], [RFC9088], and [RFC9352].
(where [RFC8664] and [RFC8814] would be added as Informative References)
Alternatively, you could let us know a different place to cite [RFC8664]
and [RFC8814] in this document.
-->
4) <!--[rfced] FYI, the Security Considerations section has been updated
to match https://wiki.ietf.org/group/ops/yang-security-guidelines.
If the differences from the approved template should be reinstated,
please let us know.
Specifically, this text is no longer present:
... without the "none" authentication
option, Transport Layer Security (TLS) [RFC8446] with mutual X.509
authentication, and HTTPS with HTTP authentication (Section 11 of
[RFC9110]).
The normative reference [RFC9110] has been removed, as it was not
cited elsewhere in the document.
-->
5) <!--[rfced] We suggest naming the column "Data Plane" no hyphen, as the
hyphen seems unnecessary. If you agree, we will ask IANA to update the
registry accordingly.
Current: IANA has added a "Data-Plane" column
Suggested: IANA has added a "Data Plane" column
[and other instances]
-->
6) <!--[rfced] FYI, "N/A" has been removed from Table 1 in order
to match the IANA registry, which does not use "N/A" for empty fields.
-->
7) <!-- [rfced] RFC 7950 is not cited anywhere in this document. Please let us
know where it should be cited; otherwise, this reference will be removed
from the Normative References.
Original:
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>. -->
8) <!-- [rfced] Terminology
a) We have received guidance from Benoît Claise and the YANG Doctors that
the terms "YANG module" and "YANG data model" are preferred. Please review
the usage in this document. For example, should text be updated as follows
or otherwise?
Abstract
Original: This document defines two YANG data modules.
Perhaps: This document defines two YANG modules.
[Section 1 already uses the latter.]
Original: The second augments the IETF MPLS YANG model to provide ...
Perhaps: The second augments the IETF MPLS YANG data model to provide ...
[And the same for similar text in Section 1.]
Acknowledgements
Original: The YANG model was developed ...
Perhaps: The YANG data model was developed ...
b) FYI, we have updated the terms below to use the form on the right,
as this is how they appear in the referenced documents (e.g., RFC 8491).
node MSD vs. Node MSD
link MSD vs. Link MSD
-->
9) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the online
Style Guide <https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language>
and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature typically
result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers. Note that our
script did not flag any words in particular, but this should still be reviewed
as a best practice.
-->
10) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have added expansions for abbreviations upon first use
per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each
expansion in the document carefully to ensure correctness.
-->
Thank you.
RFC Editor/mc/ar
On Dec 11, 2024, [email protected] wrote:
*****IMPORTANT*****
Updated 2024/12/11
RFC Author(s):
--------------
Instructions for Completing AUTH48
Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and
approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC.
If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies
available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/).
You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties
(e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing
your approval.
Planning your review
---------------------
Please review the following aspects of your document:
* RFC Editor questions
Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor
that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as
follows:
<!-- [rfced] ... -->
These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email.
* Changes submitted by coauthors
Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your
coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you
agree to changes submitted by your coauthors.
* Content
Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot
change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention to:
- IANA considerations updates (if applicable)
- contact information
- references
* Copyright notices and legends
Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in
RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions
(TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
* Semantic markup
Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of
content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode>
and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at
<https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>.
* Formatted output
Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the
formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is
reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting
limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.
Submitting changes
------------------
To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all
the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties
include:
* your coauthors
* [email protected] (the RPC team)
* other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g.,
IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the
responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).
* [email protected], which is a new archival mailing list
to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion
list:
* More info:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc
* The archive itself:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/
* Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out
of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter).
If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you
have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded,
[email protected] will be re-added to the CC list and
its addition will be noted at the top of the message.
You may submit your changes in one of two ways:
An update to the provided XML file
— OR —
An explicit list of changes in this format
Section # (or indicate Global)
OLD:
old text
NEW:
new text
You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit
list of changes, as either form is sufficient.
We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem
beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text,
and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be found in
the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager.
Approving for publication
--------------------------
To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating
that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’,
as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval.
Files
-----
The files are available here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9702.xml
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9702.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9702.pdf
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9702.txt
Diff file of the text:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9702-diff.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9702-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
Diff of the XML:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9702-xmldiff1.html
Tracking progress
-----------------
The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9702
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thank you for your cooperation,
RFC Editor
--------------------------------------
RFC9702 (draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-12)
Title : YANG Data Model for Maximum SID Depth Types and MPLS Maximum
SID Depth
Author(s) : Y. Qu, A. Lindem, S. Litkowski, J. Tantsura
WG Chair(s) : Nicolai Leymann, Tarek Saad, Tony Li
Area Director(s) : Jim Guichard, John Scudder, Gunter Van de Velde
--
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
