[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [i2rs] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-10

2017-07-10 13:17:31
Hello Christian,

Thank you for your review.  We will apply the suggested updates.

--- Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Christian 
Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2017 1:16 AM
To: rtg-dir(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Cc: i2rs(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; 
Subject: [i2rs] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-10

Reviewer: Christian Hopps
Review result: Has Nits


I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this draft.

The purpose of this review is to determine it's compatibility with the new 
revised datastore model guidelines.

For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see 

Document: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-10.txt
Reviewer: Christian Hopps
Review Date: July 8, 2017
Intended Status: Standards Track


- This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be
  considered prior to being submitted to the IESG.


- This document adapts the suggested NMDA guidelines quite nicely.

- Perhaps an informative reference to the NMDA guidelines draft would be useful.

- Appendix A: Second Paragraph, last sentence:
  - I believe that it should say:

      "instead of ietf-network and ietf-network-topology"

    it currently says:

      "instead of ietf-network and ietf-network-state"

- IS-IS example model (sorry couldn't help myself :)

  - The example IS-IS l3-node-attributes augmentation isis-node-attributes
    includes an "iso-pseudonode-id". This isn't a node attribute, but rather a
    link one (it is repeated later under link attributes).

  - The isis-wg suggests to use "IS-IS" consistently, where possible, in
    documents rather than "isis" or "ISIS".

i2rs mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>