Thanks Jeff. Mahesh, are you ok as well?
Thanks, Ketan On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 7:23 PM Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote: > Ketan, > > > On Jun 4, 2025, at 3:12 AM, Ketan Talaulikar <[email protected]> > wrote: > I got myself educated (a little bit) on the YANG modeling guidelines as > part of the IESG review of > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis/ > > > :-) > > > Following are some YANG organization specific comments on each of the 3 > documents. > > *1) For draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers* > > a) > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication-24.html#section-6.1 > has to be moved from that document into the IANA considerations of this > document. This IANA registry feeds into an IANA maintained YANG module that > needs to be self-contained in this document where those two types are > actually specified. > > > That's "fine". In prior iterations of the secure sequence number docs, > the references to how ISAAC required the optimized procedures was less > clear and thus ownership of the things supporting optimized made sense in > the parent document rather than the child documents. > > > *2) For draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication* > > a) The following sections need to be deleted (i.e., they have no place in > any of these documents) because they refer to an IANA maintained YANG module > > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication-24.html#section-6.4 > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication-24.html#name-updated-bfd-iana-module > > b) For the YANG Model in > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication-24.html#section-5.3 > there are two options: > i) It can be split so the main part related to optimized auth remains in > this document and the part specific to the two ISAAC auth types is moved > into draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers. IMHO this would be the correct > and modular way to develop YANG modules. > > > Sorry, go check with your ops ADs again. Have we developed a procedure by > which more than one document pre-publication can update the same IANA > module? If so, please supply a reference to the current draft/RFC that > details how to do so. > > OR > ii) It can be moved entirely into draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers > to avoid the circular normative reference between these two drafts. This > will also better align with (1) (a). I believe this is what Reshad was > suggesting. > > > That would be acceptable, but largely because 1 works out well enough > today. > > > *3) For draft-ietf-bfd-stability - all seems good to me from YANG > perspective* > > Please let me know your thoughts and if you agree, it would be great to > get some draft updates posted so we can start closing off review comments. > > > Patches addressing the YANG points will be trivial to do. > > You have a large backlog of items covering the optimized procedures > already pending to comment on. Since the remaining authors for the > optimized draft are their usual silent selves, I'm tempted to just push the > queued items in the github branch for broader IETF review. > > -- Jeff > >
