YANG Doctor review of rev-01 by Reshad Rahman.

Caveat: I won't pretend to fully understand the motivation behind DORMS. I've reviewed this mostly from a YANG perspective.

Comments/questions:
- OOC, why is DORMS limited to RESTCONF? I do understand why RESTCONF is appealing, but potential deployments might be using NETCONF, CORECONF or gNMI?
- The data in ietf-dorms is said to be read-only but doesn't have "config false"
- I'd add a "dorms" container at the top with "metadata" under "dorms". If other DORMS data needs to be added in the future, it would get added under "dorms". This would minimize top-level nodes as per RFC8407 section 4.10.
- "mandatory" is not needed for list keys, it's actually ignored as mentioned in RFC7950 section section 7.8.2
- If a group requires a minimum number of udp-stream entries (e.g. 1), add a "min-elements" statement under "group". If not, leave as-is.
- 7.1 Security considerations, looks like the read-only data is not deemed sensitive, please add a statement to that effect. Regarding NACM, consider a SHOULD instead of MAY?

Regards,
Reshad.
- Even though the YANG model is not complex, adding an example always helps.

Regards,
Reshad.