Subject: [netconf] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-20: (with COMMENT)

From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 13:08:52 -0700

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-20: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the work everyone has put into this document. I have only a small
number of comments and some nits.

== COMMENTS ==
- section 4, "MUST be supported" but by which party ?
- section 7, MUST all components (except 'error-severity') be part of the
rpc-error ? If so, then make it clear - section 8, see the subscriber as the
ennemy, but, can also the exporter be a threat?

== NITS ==
- it would be clearer to group all authors by affiliation
- abstract providing references to subscribed notifications and YANG-push
documents would be a plus - section 3, expand RPC - section 3, probably because
I am not a native English speaker, but I cannot really parse "A solution MUST
reply" esp the word "solution"