Hi Vincent, Thanks for the review and sorry for the late reply. I've uploaded version -25 to address your comments. Detailed answers below inline.
Thanks, Yingzhen On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 3:51 AM Vincent Roca via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Reviewer: Vincent Roca > Review result: Has Nits > > Hello, > > I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate’s ongoing > effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These > comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area > directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > Summary: has nits > > The security considerations section follows the usual guidelines for YANG > modules. > However, I have two comments: > - the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph: > "These are the subtrees and data nodes and their > sensitivity/vulnerability:" > suggests that the sensitivity and vulnerability of the 4 data nodes be > discussed. > Yet I see nothing. > > [Yingzhen]: Thanks for catching these. I've added some text, hopefully it addresses your concern. -- the sentence: > "And the augmentations to the ISIS link state database." > is incomplete. > > [Yingzhen]: "And the augmentations to the ISIS link state database." goes with the five read-only nodes above it. It means all the new TLVs added to the ISIS link state database as there are many of them. Regards, > Vincent > > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
