Hi Jeff, The PR looks good. Thank you.
Cheers, Med De : Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> Envoyé : mardi 9 septembre 2025 18:57 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[email protected]> Cc : The IESG <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; rtg-bfd@ietf. org <[email protected]>; Reshad Rahman <[email protected]>; Reshad Rahman <[email protected]> Objet : Re: Mohamed Boucadair's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication-30: (with COMMENT) Med, The remainder of these are covered in https://github.com/bfd-wg/optimized-auth/pull/75 On Sep 5, 2025, at 2:29 AM, [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> wrote: Consistent with other changes in this doc set, we need to highlight that this is for an experimental feature: OLD: "This YANG module augments the base BFD YANG model to add attributes related to BFD Optimized Authentication. NEW: "This YANG module augments the base BFD YANG model to add attributes related to the experimental BFD Optimized Authentication. Done. # Redundant behavior Section 3 The contents of an Up packet MUST NOT change aside from the Authentication Section without strong authentication. Vs. Section 6: In this specification, the contents of an Up packet MUST NOT change aside from the Authentication Section without strong authentication. Keep the normative language in one place. The text serves as an emphasis on the procedures and I suggest keeping each of the instances. [Med] You can keep the instances, but my suggestion was to keep the normative language only once. I've chosen to lower-case the section 3 instance. I would not be shocked if someone else in later review notes this as a discrepancy. # YANG terminology CURRENT: This YANG module imports YANG Key Chain [RFC8177], A YANG Data Model for Routing Management (NMDA version) [RFC8349], and YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding 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)." I suspect this comment is incorrect. Each of the points of complaint are the title of the RFC in question. :-) [Med] You can keep the titles but the point is that we don't import RFCs but modules. You can fix this by saying "This YANG module imports modules defined in ...". Thanks. Done. # Security template Please update 10.2 to follow the template in RFC8407bis. I've done so. Given that the template isn't fully genericized, please check the implemented. [Med] I suggest we make this change: OLD: Some of the readable data nodes in this YANG module may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config, or notification) to these data nodes. Specifically, the following subtrees and data nodes have particular sensitivities/ vulnerabilities: There are no read-only data nodes defined in this model. NEW: There are no particularly sensitive readable data nodes. Done. However, note 8407bis-28's current text is what lead me to the prior text. Consider recommending a change to that document that closes the gap. -- Jeff ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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.
