Subject: [Netconf] js review of draft-ietf-netconf-system-notifications-04

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 17:12:53 +0200

I have reviewed draft-ietf-netconf-system-notifications-04. I am fine
with the document in general and support this going forward towards
the IESG. I have a number of little issues and nits, most of them are
purly editorial.

1) I suggested to put the acronym NETCONF into the title so that RFCs
   related to NETCONF are easy to search and find in the RFC list:

   Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) Base Notifications

2) For my taste, there is a bit too much structure. I suggest to
   simply remove the subsection title 2.1.1. The 3rd paragraph in 2.1
   could also simply become a reference to [RFC6020] in the first
   sentence where YANG is mentioned.

3) s/defines some events/defines some notifications/

4) I suggest to call the module ietf-netconf-notifications (dropping
   the base) and I suggest to change the prefix to 'ncn'. To me,
   ncbase is a bit confusing (and ietf-netconf-monitoring uses ncm).

5) s/common NETCONF base notification events/common NETCONF notifications/

6) s/to identity/to identify

7) The case 'by-user' could probably be called 'by-session'.

8) s/Summarizes each edit being reported./
     The notification summarizes the edits that have been detected./

9) I suggest to call 'target-datastore' simply 'datastore'.

A) References to 4741 / 4742 (security considerations) and 4741bis
   (elsewhere) need to updated.

B) s/, and may be now be vulnerable to unspecified attacks//g

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>