On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 6:59 PM Kent Watsen <kent+i...@watsen.net> wrote:
> This email begins a two-week WGLC on: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-node-tags-09 > > Please take time to review this draft and post comments by May 2nd. > Favorable comments are especially welcomed. > > I have read the latest draft and IMO it needs more work. 1) metrics The identities to represent system tags are quite vague. There are no specific guidelines for selecting the correct tag. There are no references to other RFCs for the metric definitions. I would expect IPPM WG to define the classification system, not NETMOD WG. 2) System tag procedures There are no procedures defined for YANG model developers. Are they supposed to add a node-tag extension to almost every leaf in the module? The administration and maintenance of node-tags will be a huge burden. That was one reason they were not added to the module-tags module in the first place. The YANG extension itself is under-specified since it offers no guidance on which YANG statements are allowed to have this extension as a sub-statement. IMO all the metrics (tag type identities) should be removed from this document and moved to separate work that is properly defined using IPPM metrics. 3) YANG module issues - what module entry is used if the node is from a module that augments another one? I would assume the augmented module not the base module. Specify which one - nacm:node-instance-identifier as a list key is complex to implement - not sure a canonical representation is possible or required - syntax allows notification and action nodes to be tagged. Are these allowed in thislist? - it is possible for multiple 'tags' entries to represent the same data node instances. Figuring out precedence and enforcing masked-tag rules seems complicated. NACM has ordered by-user semantics. This module has "all entries at once" semantics. Not that easy to implement or deploy. - What if a tag value appears in the masked-tag leaf-list that has the same value as the 'tag' key leaf? - the indentation in the YANG module is wrong for masked-tag - the list and key naming (tags/tag) is not consistent with other IETF modules . Maybe should be list tag and key leaf id. Andy > This draft went through a WGLC a year ago. The authors addressed the > comments received and have been were waiting for feedback. In essence, > this draft is presumed to reflect WG consensus and thusly, if no objection > is received, the draft will move to the next step in the publication > process. > > Ref: > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/n2P9yohA-X-xSIt6FlMr4wOqmuI/ > > Kent // co-chair > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
