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]> 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/ 
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.

> 
> # 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;
> 
> # 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.

> 
> # 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.

> 
> # 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.

> 
> # 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

[mj] Ok.

> 
> Cheers,
> Med
> 
> 
> 


Mahesh Jethanandani
[email protected]






Reply via email to