Hello Acee Thanks for prompt reply.
About modules/data models, my thinking is: * A YANG module is a basically a file (usually part of a YANG data model) * A data model is a generic concept defining ‘something’ with some syntax * A YANG data model is a data model using YANG concepts, usually implemented by one or more YANG modules -éric From: Acee Lindem <acee.i...@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, 2 April 2025 at 12:46 To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyn...@cisco.com> Cc: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ospf-sr-y...@ietf.org <draft-ietf-ospf-sr-y...@ietf.org>, lsr-cha...@ietf.org <lsr-cha...@ietf.org>, lsr <lsr@ietf.org>, Christian Hopps <cho...@chopps.org>, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanand...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang-37: (with COMMENT) Hi Éric, > On Apr 2, 2025, at 4:07 AM, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> > wrote: > > Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang-37: 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/ > 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-ospf-sr-yang/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > # Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang-37 > CC @evyncke > > Thank you for the work put into this document as it represents nearly 10 years > of effort :-O > > Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be > appreciated even if only for my own education), and some nits. > > Special thanks to Christian Hopps for the shepherd's concise write-up > including > the WG consensus and the justification of the intended status. > > I hope that this review helps to improve the document, > > Regards, > > -éric > > ## COMMENTS (non-blocking) > > ### SR over/for MPLS ? > > I think that the right term is "segment routing *over* the MPLS data plane". Sure - this is the terminology in RFC 8402. > > ### Title > > s/A YANG Data Model for OSPF Segment Routing for the MPLS Data Plane/A YANG > Data Model for OSPF *Extensions for* Segment Routing *over* the MPLS Data > Plane/ Sure. > > ### Abstract > > Suggest to be consistent with the title, i.e., s/YANG data module/YANG data > model/ Ok. Even after Mahesh's explanation, this it is clear as mud as to when "YANG Model" and when "YANG Data Module" should be used. > > ### Section 2 > > I do not understand the acronym in `Segment Routing (SRGB)` why not "SR" only > ? > > s/The ietf-ospf-sr-mpls *data* module/The ietf-ospf-sr-mpls *YANG* module > *defined in this document*/ There is no such thing as a "data module" IMHO. Fixed. > > ### Section 3 > > Please add "MPLS" in the section title. Added to both section 2 and 3 title. Thanks, Acee > > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- lsr@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to lsr-le...@ietf.org
