Hi Med, See comments inline with [mj1]
> On Sep 4, 2025, at 1:02 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi Mahesh, > > Thanks for the follow-up. > > Please see inline. > > Cheers, > Med > > De : Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Envoyé : mercredi 3 septembre 2025 19:03 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Cc : The IESG <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; rtg-bfd@ietf. org > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Reshad Rahman <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Objet : Re: Mohamed Boucadair's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-stability-19: > (with COMMENT) > > > > Hi Med, > > Thanks for your review. See comments inline with [mj]. > > > On Sep 3, 2025, at 8:06 AM, Mohamed Boucadair via Datatracker > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-bfd-stability-19: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > <https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/> > > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-stability/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-stability/> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hi Ashesh, Mahesh, Ankur, Santosh, and Mach, > > Thank you for the effort put into this document. > > Thanks also to Gyan Mishra for the OPSDIR review and to Jeff for the > follow-up. > > Please find below some comments with a focus on the YANG part: > > # YANG terminology > > CURRENT: > This YANG module imports Common YANG Types [RFC6991], A YANG Data > Model for Routing [RFC8349], and YANG Data Model for Bidirectional > Forwading Detection (BFD) [RFC9314]. > > This should reason about importing the various modules, not data models. > Please > refer to 8407bis which says: > > “Likewise, "YANG module" should be used when using terms related to YANG > module > specifications (e.g., augmentation or deviation).“ > > [mj] Ok. > [Med] ACK [mj1] On second look, these are the titles of the drafts, and therefore the guidance provided by 8407bis does not help. > > > # Consistency > > Section 7.2 has: > > CURRENT: prefix "bfds"; > > I suggest to be consistent with the pattern used so far for BFD (bfd-ip-mh, > bfd-ip-sh, bfd-lag, etc.). > > NEW: prefix bfd-s; > [Med] I guess this will be fixed. > > > # Description > > Consider updating the description of the module to highlight this is about > experimental extensions. > > [mj] Ok. How about this? > > OLD: > "This YANG module augments the base BFD YANG model to add > attributes related to BFD Stability. In particular, it adds a > a per-session count for BFD packets that are lost. > > NEW: > "This experimental YANG module augments the base BFD YANG model to add > attributes related to BFD Stability. In particular, it adds a > a per-session count for BFD packets that are lost. > > [Med] As we don’t have the notion of “experimental YANG module”, I tend to > prefer this wording: > > NEW: > "This YANG module augments the base BFD YANG model to add > experimental attributes related to BFD Stability. In particular, it adds > a per-session count for BFD packets that are lost. [mj1] I am struggling to call them “experimental attributes”. The attributes themselves are not experimental. It is the exercise of testing BFD for stability that is experimental. Therefore it would be better to say: NEW1: "This YANG module augments the base BFD YANG model to add attributes related to the experiment of BFD Stability. In particular, it adds a a per-session count for BFD packets that are lost.” > > > # Feature Description > > OLD: > description > "If supported, the feature allows for BFD sessions to be > monitored for packets lost."; > > NEW: > description > "Indicates that the implementation supports monitoring > of packets lost in BFD sessions."; > > [mj] We prefer the original description. > [Med] I don’t parse the “if supported” part. The description should be > describing what the feature is about. Whether this is reported or not by > server will be follow normal behavior. [mj1] Simplified it further to say: NEW: description “This feature enables BFD sessions to be monitored for lost packets."; > > # Modules live outside documents > > OLD: > description > "BFD Null Auth type defined in this draft."; > > NEW: > description > "BFD Null Auth type."; > > [mj] But it is defined in the draft, therefore it is being called out as such. > [Med] Sure. Please use a reference statement for that. [mj1] There is a reference statement that follows the description pointing to the draft. > > # Security template > > Please update 9.2 to follow the template in RFC8407bis. > > # Normative references > > RFC6241, RFC8040, RFC8446, 9000 should be listed as informative. Please refer > to the note at https://wiki.ietf.org/group/ops/yang-security-guidelines > <https://wiki.ietf.org/group/ops/yang-security-guidelines> > > [mj] Ok. > [Med] Thanks. [mj1] Done. > > > Cheers, > Med > > > > > > Mahesh Jethanandani > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations > confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu > ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages > electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou > falsifie. Merci. > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged > information that may be protected by law; > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete > this message and its attachments. > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been > modified, changed or falsified. > Thank you. Mahesh Jethanandani [email protected]
