Hi Paul, Just checking in on this document set as we don’t believe we’ve heard back from you since the message below. Please let us know if this is in error; otherwise, we look forward to hearing from you once you have completed your review/updates.
Thank you. Megan Ferguson RFC Production Center > On Jan 5, 2026, at 10:22 AM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Megan, > I will resume the revision of this cluster from next week because I am > attending an international conference this week. > > When I have done the revision, I will let you know. > > I think I will be able to finish this revision this January. > > > All, > Have a happy new year in 2026! > > Thanks. > > Best Regards, > Paul > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 2:04 AM Megan Ferguson > <[email protected]> wrote: > All, > > Happy New Year! > > Just a status update that this document set awaits author action. > > Please let us know if we can be of assistance as you address our list of > queries (see our initial message). > > Thank you. > > Megan Ferguson > RFC Production Center > > > On Dec 1, 2025, at 7:47 AM, Megan Ferguson <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Hi Paul and Bob, > > > > No worries from our side and thanks for the updates! > > > > Megan Ferguson > > RFC Production Center > > > > > >> On Nov 25, 2025, at 5:08 PM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Robert and Megan, > >> I have been busy with my university teaching since the IETF 124. > >> I will be able to work on this cluster of I2NSF drafts from next week. > >> > >> I am sorry for this delay. > >> > >> Thanks. > >> > >> Best Regards, > >> Paul > >> =========================== > >> Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong > >> Professor > >> Department of Computer Science and Engineering > >> Sungkyunkwan University > >> Mobile: +82-10-4758-1765 > >> Phone: +82-31-299-4957 > >> Email: [email protected], [email protected] > >> URI: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php > >> > >> > >> 2025년 11월 26일 (수) 오전 7:08, Robert Moskowitz <[email protected]>님이 작성: > >> I just found this thread in a supposedly inactive folder! > >> > >> I will attempt to figure it out... > >> > >> Bob > >> > >> > >> On 11/3/25 12:27 PM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong wrote: > >>> Megan, > >>> Thanks for your understanding and support.:-) > >>> > >>> If I have questions about my work on this cluster, I will contact RFC > >>> editors in Montreal. > >>> > >>> Thanks. > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> Paul > >>> > >>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 12:23 PM Megan Ferguson > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Hi Paul, > >>> > >>> No problem from our end; please take the time you need. > >>> > >>> I am not in Montreal, but there are several editors from the RPC there > >>> with office hours at the RFC Editor table. Please feel free to either > >>> stop by and see them or email me directly if you have anything you’d like > >>> to ask as you work through your revisions. > >>> > >>> Enjoy IETF 124! > >>> > >>> Megan Ferguson > >>> RFC Production Center > >>> > >>>> On Nov 1, 2025, at 1:23 AM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi Megan, > >>>> I need more time on this cluster of the I2NSF drafts because I was busy > >>>> with my teaching and research last month. > >>>> I am in Montreal for the IETF 124 Meeting, so I will focus on the > >>>> revision of those drafts according to your comments. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for your waiting and patience. > >>>> > >>>> Best Regards, > >>>> Paul > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 1:37 AM Megan Ferguson > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> Paul, > >>>> > >>>> Perfect timing as I will be out of office next week. > >>>> > >>>> Note that if you do encounter any blocking issue that requires > >>>> assistance in my absence, you can still reach out to > >>>> [email protected] (otherwise, your response will be handled upon > >>>> my return). > >>>> > >>>> Thank you. > >>>> > >>>> Megan Ferguson > >>>> RFC Production Center > >>>> > >>>>> On Oct 9, 2025, at 8:21 AM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong > >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Megan, > >>>>> That's great! > >>>>> > >>>>> I will work on your questions from tomorrow for a week and will come > >>>>> back to you > >>>>> when I have them resolved in the five revised xml files. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best Regards, > >>>>> Paul > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 11:02 PM Megan Ferguson > >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> Hi Paul, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you for sending along the ordering information; we have noted > >>>>> your response and will use this information in our editing and RFC > >>>>> number assignment. > >>>>> > >>>>> Note that these documents will remain in AUTH state until we hear back > >>>>> with the updated files addressing Questions 1-10. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you for your attention to this document set! > >>>>> > >>>>> Megan Ferguson > >>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Oct 9, 2025, at 4:41 AM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong > >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Megan, > >>>>>> Here are my answers as the editor of all these six drafts inline below. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 10:58 PM Megan Ferguson > >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> All, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> A further question: do you have guidance on reading order for these > >>>>>> drafts? > >>>>>> => Yes, we have guidance on reading order for them. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If so, please let us know using an RFC NNNN, RFC NNNN+1, RFC NNNN+2 > >>>>>> format. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-29 => RFC NNNN + 3 > >>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model-20 => RFC NNNN + 4 > >>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-18 => RFC NNNN + 5 > >>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-32 => RFC NNNN > >>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-26 => RFC NNNN + 1 > >>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-31 => RFC NNNN + 2 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Best Regards, > >>>>>> Paul > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Megan Ferguson > >>>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Oct 1, 2025, at 8:47 AM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong > >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Megan, > >>>>>>> Sure, we can work on those documents together. > >>>>>>> If I need your help, I will let you know. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Best Regards, > >>>>>>> Paul > >>>>>>> =========================== > >>>>>>> Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong > >>>>>>> Professor > >>>>>>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering > >>>>>>> Sungkyunkwan University > >>>>>>> Phone: +82-31-299-4957 > >>>>>>> Email: [email protected], [email protected] > >>>>>>> URI: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 2025년 10월 1일 (수) 오전 12:09, Megan Ferguson > >>>>>>> <[email protected]>님이 작성: > >>>>>>> Hi Paul, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thank you for your reply. We look forward to working with you to get > >>>>>>> these documents moving through the publication process! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I’ve made sure to update the CC field to include the AUTH48 archive > >>>>>>> and Roman as AD (and removed Deb Cooley per her separate reply). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Please feel free to reach out with any questions/concerns as > >>>>>>> necessary. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thank you. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Megan Ferguson > >>>>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Sep 30, 2025, at 3:09 AM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong > >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi Megan, > >>>>>>>> Thanks for your excellent work on this cluster of I2NSF YANG Data > >>>>>>>> Model drafts. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I will work on your comments and questions this and next weeks as > >>>>>>>> the editor of all these five drafts > >>>>>>>> and come back to you later. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Best Regards, > >>>>>>>> Paul > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> =========================== > >>>>>>>> Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong > >>>>>>>> Professor > >>>>>>>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering > >>>>>>>> Sungkyunkwan University > >>>>>>>> Phone: +82-31-299-4957 > >>>>>>>> Email: [email protected], [email protected] > >>>>>>>> URI: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php > >>>>>>>> LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaehoonjeong/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 1:44 PM Megan Ferguson > >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>> Authors, Editors, *ADs, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We have a number of questions related to the following documents > >>>>>>>> from Cluster 405 (C405): > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model-20 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-31 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-32 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-26 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-29 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We note that resolving these questions may require significant > >>>>>>>> author input or updates. As such, we would like to raise these > >>>>>>>> issues now, rather than during AUTH48. Please review the > >>>>>>>> questions/comments below, discuss amongst yourselves, update the > >>>>>>>> attached XML files with any necessary changes, and resubmit the xml > >>>>>>>> files to the RPC via email at your earliest convenience. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> As this is outside our normal process, note that the files are in > >>>>>>>> various states of editorial completion and have not yet benefitted > >>>>>>>> from a final review within the RPC. Therefore, we ask that you > >>>>>>>> ignore any edits or queries in the XML files not directly related to > >>>>>>>> the list below (i.e., please refrain from making any further > >>>>>>>> changes at this time). All other queries/issues will be handled > >>>>>>>> once the documents reach AUTH48. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please reach out with any questions and let us know if we can be of > >>>>>>>> further assistance as you complete this process. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Note: Each of the above documents has been moved to “AUTH” state > >>>>>>>> (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/) as they are awaiting > >>>>>>>> author action prior to moving forward in the publication process. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The related cluster information page is viewable at: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C405 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thank you. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Megan Ferguson > >>>>>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 1) The text in the Security Considerations sections of the > >>>>>>>> following documents does not match the boilerplate at > >>>>>>>> https://wiki.ietf.org/group/ops/yang-security-guidelines. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We also note that RFC 4252 has not been cited in the references > >>>>>>>> sections. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please consider what, if any, updates need to be made. Note that > >>>>>>>> these updates will likely require *AD approval. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model-20 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-31 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-32 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-26 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> For draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-29: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> As we do not see any mention of RPC operations in this document, > >>>>>>>> please confirm that the "Some of the RPC operations" paragraph as > >>>>>>>> listed on <https://wiki.ietf.org/group/ops/yang-security-guidelines> > >>>>>>>> is not applicable to this document. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 2) *AD - please review and approve the changes that the authors made > >>>>>>>> between version -18 and version -20 of > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model at: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model/history/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 3) For each document in the list at the top of this mail, please > >>>>>>>> review the following related to titles: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We note that most of the published RFCs containing YANG modules > >>>>>>>> format their titles as "A YANG Data Model for...", for example: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> RFC 9094 - A YANG Data Model for Wavelength Switched Optical > >>>>>>>> Networks (WSONs) > >>>>>>>> RFC 9093 - A YANG Data Model for Layer 0 Types > >>>>>>>> RFC 9067 - A YANG Data Model for Routing Policy > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We also note the guidance from RFC 7322 (RFC Style Guide) to expand > >>>>>>>> abbreviations in document titles. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please consider whether the titles of these documents should be > >>>>>>>> updated to something like the following example: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Perhaps: > >>>>>>>> A YANG Data Model for Interface to Network Security Functions > >>>>>>>> (I2NSF) Monitoring > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Note: If changes are made, please also consider if changes to the > >>>>>>>> abbreviated title should be made as well. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 4) The following questions relate to the Terminology sections: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> a) We note that these documents: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model-20 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-31 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-32 > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-29 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> include the following text in the Terminology section: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> This document uses the terminology described in [RFC8329]. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> However, when looking at the Terminology section of RFC 8329 > >>>>>>>> (included below for your convenience), we see that no definitions > >>>>>>>> are listed: there is simply a list of terms and a pointer to > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-08 > >>>>>>>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology/), > >>>>>>>> which is now expired: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 2.2. Definitions > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The following terms, which are used in this document, are defined > >>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>> the I2NSF terminology document [I2NSF-TERMS]: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Capability > >>>>>>>> Controller > >>>>>>>> Firewall > >>>>>>>> I2NSF Consumer > >>>>>>>> I2NSF NSF-Facing Interface > >>>>>>>> I2NSF Policy Rule > >>>>>>>> I2NSF Producer > >>>>>>>> I2NSF Registration Interface > >>>>>>>> I2NSF Registry > >>>>>>>> Interface > >>>>>>>> Interface Group > >>>>>>>> Intrusion Detection System > >>>>>>>> Intrusion Protection System > >>>>>>>> Network Security Function > >>>>>>>> Role > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We further note that not all terms listed in RFC 8329 are used in > >>>>>>>> this document set and that some terms from > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-08 are used but not listed in RFC 8329 > >>>>>>>> (e.g., I2NSF Consumer-Facing Interface). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We recommend including the definitions used in this set of documents > >>>>>>>> in the documents themselves instead of pointing to an expired draft > >>>>>>>> from 2018. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Note: If more than one document in this cluster uses a term, we > >>>>>>>> suggest including the definition in one document and including a > >>>>>>>> citation to that document in the other documents in the cluster. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> b) Related to the above, > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-26 uses: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> This document uses the following terms defined in [RFC3444], > >>>>>>>> [RFC8329] and [I-D.ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model]. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> However, the definitions listed and those in RFC 8329 (and thus > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-08) are not the same. For example: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-26: > >>>>>>>> Network Security Function (NSF): A function that is responsible > >>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>> a specific treatment of received packets. A Network Security > >>>>>>>> Function can act at various layers of a protocol stack (e.g., at > >>>>>>>> the network layer or other OSI layers). Sample Network Security > >>>>>>>> Service Functions are as follows: Firewall, Intrusion > >>>>>>>> Prevention/ > >>>>>>>> Detection System (IPS/IDS), Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), > >>>>>>>> Application Visibility and Control (AVC), network virus and > >>>>>>>> malware scanning, sandbox, Data Loss Prevention (DLP), > >>>>>>>> Distributed > >>>>>>>> Denial of Service (DDoS) mitigation and TLS proxy. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-08: > >>>>>>>> Network Security Function (NSF): Software that provides a set of > >>>>>>>> security-related services. Examples include detecting unwanted > >>>>>>>> activity and blocking or mitigating the effect of such unwanted > >>>>>>>> activity in order to fulfil service requirements. The NSF can > >>>>>>>> also help in supporting communication stream integrity and > >>>>>>>> confidentiality. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please review the above text and consider if/how to update either > >>>>>>>> the citation or the definition. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> c) Related to a), we see RFC 8329 and > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-08 use the term "Intrusion Protection > >>>>>>>> System (IPS)” while this set of documents uses Intrusion Prevention > >>>>>>>> System (however, in draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-32, we do > >>>>>>>> see "intrusion detection and/or protection" as well as "Intrusion > >>>>>>>> Prevention System (IPS)"). Please review and update accordingly. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 5) The following questions relate to the reference clauses in the > >>>>>>>> YANG modules: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> a) We see mixed styles in reference clauses with regard to use of a > >>>>>>>> section number, a concept name, a section name/title, and an RFC > >>>>>>>> title. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We suggest making the reference clauses in the YANG modules uniform > >>>>>>>> following the pattern below to match the guidance in > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-28 > >>>>>>>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis/) > >>>>>>>> where a section number (instead of a concept) is pointed to. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>> reference > >>>>>>>> "RFC 9110: HTTP Semantics > >>>>>>>> - Request Method PUT"; > >>>>>>>> Perhaps: > >>>>>>>> reference > >>>>>>>> "RFC 9110: HTTP Semantics, Section 9.3.4"; > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> b) For draft-ietf-i2nsf-monitoring-data-model-20: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [IEEE-802.1AB]'s title is "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan > >>>>>>>> area networks - Station and Media Access Control Connectivity > >>>>>>>> Discovery" rather than "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan > >>>>>>>> area networks - Station and Media Access Control Connectivity > >>>>>>>> Discovery - > >>>>>>>> Link Layer Discovery Protocol (LLDP)”. Should this be updated as > >>>>>>>> follows in the YANG reference clauses? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Current: > >>>>>>>> reference > >>>>>>>> "IEEE-802.1AB: IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan > >>>>>>>> area networks - Station and Media Access Control > >>>>>>>> Connectivity Discovery - Link Layer Discovery Protocol > >>>>>>>> (LLDP)" > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Perhaps: > >>>>>>>> reference > >>>>>>>> "IEEE-802.1AB: IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan > >>>>>>>> area networks - Station and Media Access Control > >>>>>>>> Connectivity Discovery" > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> c) For draft-ietf-i2nsf-monitoring-data-model-20: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [RFC4861] does not contain a section titled "Neighbor Discovery > >>>>>>>> Protocol (ND)" and because the entire document is about Neighbor > >>>>>>>> Discovery, please review whether a section pointer is necessary when > >>>>>>>> completing the updates suggested in (a) above. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Current: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> RFC 4861: Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6) - > >>>>>>>> Neighbor Discovery Protocol (ND)”; > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> d) See a further possible update to YANG reference clauses in > >>>>>>>> question 6e below. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 6) The following questions relate to citations/references of these > >>>>>>>> documents: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> a) The "YANG Module Names" registry is defined in RFC 6020 and not > >>>>>>>> in RFC 7950. Please see Section 14 of RFC 6020 > >>>>>>>> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020) and > >>>>>>>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We have changed "7950" to "6020" accordingly (and added an > >>>>>>>> informative reference entry to RFC 6020). Please let us know any > >>>>>>>> concerns with these updates. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>> This document requests IANA to register the following YANG module in > >>>>>>>> the "YANG Module Names" registry [RFC7950][RFC8525]: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Currently: > >>>>>>>> IANA has registered the following YANG module in the "YANG Module > >>>>>>>> Names" registry [RFC6020] [RFC8525]: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> b) We note that some of these documents contain snippets of XML. > >>>>>>>> Per > >>>>>>>> <https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/formal-languages-use/>, > >>>>>>>> we believe the documents should cite [W3C.REC-xml-20081126] > >>>>>>>> ("Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth Edition)") somewhere > >>>>>>>> in the body of the document and list it as a Normative Reference, > >>>>>>>> per RFC 8349. Please add an appropriate citation and reference > >>>>>>>> entry where necessary. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> c) For draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-31: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We see several RFCs mentioned in the lead-in text to the YANG module > >>>>>>>> that are not included in the YANG module itself. Please review and > >>>>>>>> consider if these citations (and possibly their corresponding > >>>>>>>> reference entries) should be removed. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The list has been included below for your convenience: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [RFC0768] > >>>>>>>> [RFC0854] > >>>>>>>> [RFC0959] > >>>>>>>> [RFC1939] > >>>>>>>> [RFC2595] > >>>>>>>> [RFC3022] > >>>>>>>> [RFC4250] > >>>>>>>> [RFC4340] > >>>>>>>> [RFC4443] > >>>>>>>> [RFC5321] > >>>>>>>> [RFC9051] > >>>>>>>> [RFC9110] > >>>>>>>> [RFC9112] > >>>>>>>> [RFC9113] > >>>>>>>> [RFC9260] > >>>>>>>> [RFC9293] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> d) For draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-31: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The reference below appears to be pointing to the POSIX.1 standard. > >>>>>>>> However, the provided URL points to a specific page in the POSIX.1 > >>>>>>>> specification for "glob". > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We recommend having this reference's URL point to the specification > >>>>>>>> in general, rather than this specific page. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Additionally, please note that there is a more up-to-date version of > >>>>>>>> POSIX.1: > >>>>>>>> https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/ > >>>>>>>> (The updated URL for "glob” is > >>>>>>>> https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/functions/glob.html) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Would you like to update this reference to the most current version? > >>>>>>>> (FYI - We have inserted a comment in the XML with this updated > >>>>>>>> information). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> For your convenience, we have included the suggested updated > >>>>>>>> reference for you to review (combining points a and b above) in text > >>>>>>>> form below: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>> [GLOB] IEEE, "The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 7, 2018 > >>>>>>>> Edition", IEEE Std 1003.1-2017, > >>>>>>>> <https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/ > >>>>>>>> functions/glob.html>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Perhaps: > >>>>>>>> [GLOB] IEEE/The Open Group, "The Open Group Base Specifications > >>>>>>>> Issue 8", POSIX.1-2024, IEEE Std 1003.1-2024, 2024, > >>>>>>>> <https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> e) For draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-31 and > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-29: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regarding the [ISO-3166-1alpha2], [ISO-3166-2], and [ISO-3166] > >>>>>>>> references: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The URL for [ISO-3166-1alpha2] goes to a page titled "ISO 3166 > >>>>>>>> Country Codes" (Note: this is the same URL that [ISO-3166-2] > >>>>>>>> redirects to). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It appears the decoding table of ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes is now > >>>>>>>> available here: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:pub:PUB500001:en. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We found the following URL for the most up-to-date version of ISO > >>>>>>>> 3166-2 (ISO 3166-2:2020): https://www.iso.org/standard/72483.html. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Would you like to update to point to the most up-to-date version of > >>>>>>>> ISO 3166 (see example reference updates below)? (FYI - We have > >>>>>>>> inserted a comment in the XML with this updated information). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Note that further updates to these references are recommended with > >>>>>>>> regard to title, etc. Please review and confirm or let us know if > >>>>>>>> any further changes are necessary: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>> [ISO-3166-2] > >>>>>>>> ISO, "ISO 3166-2:2007", > >>>>>>>> <https://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/ > >>>>>>>> country_codes.htm#2012_iso3166-2>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Suggested: > >>>>>>>> [ISO-3166-2] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ISO, "Codes for the representation of names of countries > >>>>>>>> and their subdivisions - Part 2: Country subdivision > >>>>>>>> code", ISO 3166-2:2020, August 2020, > >>>>>>>> <https://www.iso.org/standard/72483.html>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>> [ISO-3166-1alpha2] > >>>>>>>> ISO, "ISO 3166-1 decoding table", > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> <https://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/country_codes/iso- > >>>>>>>> 3166-1_decoding_table.htm>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Perhaps: > >>>>>>>> [ISO-3166-1alpha2] > >>>>>>>> ISO, "Decoding table of ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes", > >>>>>>>> <https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:pub:PUB500001:en>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> In light of the suggested updates to the titles (above) and to match > >>>>>>>> the citation tags used, we further suggest updating the titles in > >>>>>>>> the YANG reference clauses to match (note that these updates would > >>>>>>>> occur in multiple places). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>> "ISO 3166-2: 3166-2 subdivision code”; > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> "ISO 3166-1: Decoding table alpha-2 country code”; > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Perhaps: > >>>>>>>> "ISO 3166-2: Codes for the representation of names of countries > >>>>>>>> and their subdivisions - Part 2: Country subdivision > >>>>>>>> code"; > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> "ISO 3166-1alpha2: Decoding table of ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes”; > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> NOTE: Throughout the the rest of the document, and in the YANG > >>>>>>>> module, we see the following mixed use when discussing these specs. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ISO 3166-2 > >>>>>>>> ISO3166-1 alpha-2 vs. ISO3166-1 alpha 2 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We have updated these for consistency within the document as well as > >>>>>>>> within the RFC Series. Please let us know any objections. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> f) For draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-32 and > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-29: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please review the references [IEEE802.3-2018] and [IEEE-802.3]. This > >>>>>>>> IEEE Standard was superseded by a new version in 2022 > >>>>>>>> (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9844436). Would you like to > >>>>>>>> update this reference to use the most current version? (FYI - We > >>>>>>>> have inserted a comment in the XML files with this updated > >>>>>>>> information). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>> [IEEE802.3-2018] > >>>>>>>> Committee, I. S., "IEEE 802.3-2018 - IEEE Standard for > >>>>>>>> Ethernet", August 2018, > >>>>>>>> <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8457469>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>> [IEEE-802.3] > >>>>>>>> Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, "IEEE > >>>>>>>> Standard for Ethernet", 2018, > >>>>>>>> <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8457469/>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Perhaps: > >>>>>>>> [IEEE802.3-2022] > >>>>>>>> IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Ethernet", IEEE Std 802.3-2022, > >>>>>>>> DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2022.9844436, July 2022, > >>>>>>>> <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9844436>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [IEEE-802.3] > >>>>>>>> IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Ethernet", IEEE Std 802.3-2022, > >>>>>>>> DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2022.9844436, July 2022, > >>>>>>>> <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9844436>. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> g) For draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-26: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please review the reference [nfv-framework]: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We found a more recent version of this ETSI Group Specification at > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> following URL: > >>>>>>>> https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/nfv/001_099/002/01.02.01_60/gs_nfv002v010201p.pdf. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Note that this appears to be Version 1.2.1 published in December > >>>>>>>> 2014, while the current reference points to Version 1.1.1 published > >>>>>>>> in October 2013. (Note: we were unable to find a URL for Version > >>>>>>>> 1.1.1). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Should this reference be updated to use the more recent version from > >>>>>>>> December 2014? (FYI - We have inserted a comment in the XML with > >>>>>>>> this updated information if you’d like to adopt it). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 7) The following questions are about contact information: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> a) Jinyong, Jaehoon, and Liang: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We see a mix of the following forms throughout this cluster: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Jinyong Tim Kim vs. Jinyong (Tim) Kim > >>>>>>>> Jaehoon Paul Jeong vs. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong (past RFCs do not use > >>>>>>>> parentheses) > >>>>>>>> Liang Frank Xia vs. Liang Xia > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We have updated to use the following consistently: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Jinyong Tim Kim > >>>>>>>> Jaehoon Paul Jeong > >>>>>>>> Liang Frank Xia > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> And we have used only single first initial for each author in the > >>>>>>>> header. Please review and update as desired. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> b) We note several authors/contributors have similar affiliations at > >>>>>>>> the same university. > >>>>>>>> Please review if updates are needed for consistency. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering > >>>>>>>> Department of Electronic, Electrical and Computer Engineering > >>>>>>>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> c) Liang: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We see slightly different addresses in different documents (e.g., > >>>>>>>> the district being listed vs. not and the code being listed vs. > >>>>>>>> not). We suggest updating to match the address published in RFC 9684 > >>>>>>>> (please also keep question 7a in mind). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> As published in RFC 9684: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Liang Xia (Frank) > >>>>>>>> Huawei Technologies > >>>>>>>> Yuhuatai District > >>>>>>>> 101 Software Avenue > >>>>>>>> Nanjing > >>>>>>>> Jiangsu, 210012 > >>>>>>>> China > >>>>>>>> Email: [email protected] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> d) Diego: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We see different addresses in these two documents. Please review > >>>>>>>> these and update for consistency as necessary. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-32: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Diego R. Lopez - Telefonica I+D, Zurbaran, 12, Madrid, 28010, > >>>>>>>> Spain, > >>>>>>>> Email: [email protected] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-26: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Diego R. Lopez - Telefonica I+D, Jose Manuel Lara, 9, Seville, > >>>>>>>> 41013, Spain. EMail: [email protected] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 8) Please review whether any of the notes in the documents should be > >>>>>>>> in the <aside> element. It is defined as "a container for content > >>>>>>>> that is semantically less important or tangential to the > >>>>>>>> content that surrounds it" > >>>>>>>> (https://authors.ietf.org/en/rfcxml-vocabulary#aside). If no > >>>>>>>> updates are necessary, please confirm that the text should remain as > >>>>>>>> is. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 9) Some author comments are present in the XML files. Please confirm > >>>>>>>> that no updates related to these comments are outstanding and delete > >>>>>>>> the resolved comments. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 10) Please review the line lengths of yang trees and other figures > >>>>>>>> to ensure they fit within the 69-character limit and make any > >>>>>>>> updates necessary. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
