I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at . Document: draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-17 Reviewer: Dan Romascanu Review Date: 2022-01-25 IETF LC End Date: 2021-11-23 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: This document defines a YANG data model for configuring security policy rules on Network Security Functions (NSF) in the Interface to the Network Security Functions (I2NSF) framework. It's a solid, well-written and complete document. It needs to be read in the context and together with several other documents belonging to the I2NSF deliveries. The document is Ready from the perspective of Gen-ART with a couple of minor non-blocking issues and a few editorial problems that could be easily clarified and fixed if needed. Major issues: Minor issues: 1. How can RFC 8329 be only an Informative Reference. The Introduction dully states that the YANG module is based upon the framework / architecture defined in RFC 8329, and Section 4 uses RFC 8329 in several reference clauses. 2. Section 4. > leaf frequency { type enumeration Is this enumeration sufficient (once, daily, weekly, monthly, yearly)? Are not more cases needed? more flexibility? Nits/editorial comments: 1. Section 3.3: > A condition clause of generic network security functions is defined as IPv4 condition, IPv6 condition, TCP condition, UDP condition, SCTP condition, DCCP condition, and ICMP (ICMPv4 and ICMPv6) condition. Should not be rather 'or' instead of 'and'? 2. Section 4: description of identity acces-violation > "Identity for access-violation. Access-violation system event is an event when a user tries to access (read, write, create, or delete) any information or execute commands above their privilege." 'above their privilege' is vague - probably meaning not-conformant with the access profile 3. Section 4 identity memory-alarm description "Identity for memory alarm. Memory is the hardware to store information temporarily or for a short period, i.e., Random Access Memory (RAM). A memory-alarm is emitted when the RAM usage exceeds the threshold."; memory-alarm is emitted when the memory usage is exceeding the threshold - RAM example does not really help, the alarm applies to all types of memory 4. Section 4 identity ot { base device-type; description "Identity for Operational Technology devices"; } identity vehicle { base device-type; description "Identity for vehicle that connects to and shares data through the Internet"; } reference clauses would help - what is an OT and a 'vehicle' (in this context)? 5. Section 4 > identity forwarding { base egress-action; description "Identity for forwarding. This action forwards the packet to another node in the network."; } 'This action forwards ... ' sounds odd. The action consists of forwarding, but does not perform it. I suggest re-wording. There are a few more such instances of 'This action [does] ...