Jie and Lada: 

I've recently listened to the I2RS meeting in IETF 101.  

Chris Hopps asked about the notifications in L2.  He was asking about a more
general use of the notification that might be useful in the 

I'm not really sure how to approach responding to his operational request -
since it really impacts all topology models.  My inclination is to push this
draft through into RFC usage, and then to work through a "-bis"
functionality.  

Jie - would you ask the individuals pushing for L2 model if that works for
them. 

Lada - would you ask the Yang doctors if this is the right approach to take.
Of course, this might be easier if we had versioning instead of a model name
change.  

Sue Hares 
-----Original Message-----
From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dongjie (Jimmy)
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:09 PM
To: Ladislav Lhotka; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [i2rs] Yangdoctors early review of
draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-04

Hi Lada, 

Thanks a lot for your review comments. Please see some replies inline:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 9:32 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]
> Subject: Yangdoctors early review of 
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-04
> 
> Reviewer: Ladislav Lhotka
> Review result: Ready
> 
> This draft and YANG modules contained therein fit into the framework 
> of I2RS network topology models. I have no substantial comments, from 
> the YANG point of view this document is ready to be published.
> 
> Comments and questions:
> 
> 1. What is the purpose of the 'flag-type' type and 'flag-identity'
identity?
> There are no identities derived from the latter.

The "flag-type" type is used in the grouping "l2-network-attributes",
"l2-node-attributes" and "l2-link-attributes".

While there is no identities derived from the "flag-identity", it is used in
the typedef flag-type. Is this OK?

> 2. Some descriptions overuse capitalization. For example, instead of 'VLAN
Name'
> I would suggest 'VLAN name'.

Thanks for catching this. Will fix in next revision.

> 3. An example of an instance document in an appendix would be very
helpful.

Thanks for your suggestion. We will add an example to the appendix.

Best regards,
Jie

_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to