I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-netmod-interfaces-cfg-10 Reviewer: Roni Even Review Date:2013–4–28 IETF LC End Date: 2013-5–3 IESG Telechat date: 2013-5-16   Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as Standard track RFC .     Major issues:   Minor issues:   1.        I had some problem understanding the “location” leaf. Section 3.2 has it as a string and says that “ The device uses the location string to identify the physical or logical entity that the configuration applies to”. I am not sure how you identify physical location having no definition of the mapping. I saw the examples in Appendix E and it looked more to me as logical mapping but not physical since it attaches a name to something in the device but I am not clear how you know what it is physically in the device. If the name 0-n or n/m are real physical entities, I think that it should be specified some place.     Nits/editorial comments: In the introduction section maybe add to the first sentence a reference to RFC6244 with some text. In section 2 are the” must” and “should”  used as described in RFC2119, if yes need capital letters In section 3.1 “It is optional in the data model,  but if the type represents a physical interface, it is mandatory”, suggest having RFC2119 language “It is OPTIONAL in the data model,  but if the type represents a physical interface, it is MUST be specified”