Hi Julien, Thanks much for your review. I’ve incorporated almost all of your comments in the -23 version.
See inline. > On Nov 29, 2023, at 11:03 AM, julien.meu...@orange.com wrote: > > 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 > https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/rtg/RtgDir > <https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/rtg/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-ospf-sr-yang-22 > Reviewer: Julien Meuric > Review Date: 2023-11-29 > Intended Status: Standard Tracks > > > *Summary:* > > This document is basically ready for publication but has nits that should be > considered prior to publication. > > > *Comments:* > > - The very first paragraph of the introduction/overview section summarizes > the basis of YANG, XML, JSON, data models... I believe we are now far beyond > those general considerations and we could skip that paragraph. Removed - thanks. > - In the grouping "ospfv3-lan-adj-sid-sub-tlvs" (p23), the leaf > "neighbor-router-id" uses type "dotted-quad". This is consistent with RFC > 8666 which specifies the associated OSPFv3 TLV, but we had a discussion about > the type for router-id in the TE YANG models. The current resolution on TEAS > side will be to consider a union of dotted-quad and ipv6-address. I wonder > how much RTGWG would be ready to consider a superset of the existing OSPFv3 > TLVs. This is the OSPF Router-ID which is different from the OSPF TE Router-ID. The two should not be confused as the OSPF Router ID is simply a 32 bit unsigned integer that is typically represented in dotted quad format. It only need be unique within the OSPF Routing Domain. Conversely, the OSPF TE Router ID is a routable IPv4 or IPv6 address. From RFC 2328 (which was inherited by RFC 5340): Router ID A 32-bit number assigned to each router running the OSPF protocol. This number uniquely identifies the router within an Autonomous System. > > > *Nits:* > > - Multiple times in description: s/SR specific/SR-specific/ Fixed. > - Multiple times in description: s/flag bits list/flag list/ > - Multiple times in description: s/flags list/flag list/ I changed these to either just “bits” or “flags” - the fact that it is a YANG list need not be included in the description. > - The description fields use a mix of "Adj sid", "adj sid", "Adj SID"... > sometimes with hyphens (not to mention the full expansions). A single phrase > should be chosen and used all along the module. Changed them all to “Adj-SID” consistent with RFC8665. > - A few description starts with "The..." (e.g., in > "ospfv2-extended-prefix-range-tlvs" on p 19, or v3 on p 22) while most of > them don't. For consistency, it should be dropped from every brief > description. I removed “The “ from all the brief descriptions. I left it in two of the TLV description that were written as complete sentences. > > - In the grouping "ospfv3-prefix-sid-sub-tlvs" (p 21 and all resulting pieces > of tree): s/perfix-sid-sub-tlvs/prefix-sid-sub-tlvs/ > - In the same grouping, the description of the container should be "Prefix > SID sub-TLV *list*." (and "Prefix SID sub-TLV." reserved for the following > list element). Fixed both in the module and tree (which was regenerated from tree). > - In the container "ti-lfa" (p 25): s/Enables TI-LFA/Enable TI-LFA/ [Not > wrong, but should be consistent with others.] Fixed. > - In the same container (p 26): "s/Topology Independent Loop Free > Alternate/Topology-Independent Loop-Free Alternate/ Fixed in this place and in another. > - In section 3 (p 37): s/The YANG modules [...] define/The YANG module [...] > defines/ Fixed. > - In the same section: s/in the modules/in the module/ Fixed. > - In the same section: s/Module ietf-ospf-sr/The module ietf-ospf-sr/ Fixed. Thanks, Acee > > > Thanks, > > Julien > _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
