The document is generally well structured and appears consistent with common YANG data model RFC practice. The Security Considerations section follows the usual pattern by referencing NETCONF/RESTCONF secure transports, NACM, writable nodes, readable nodes, and notifications. 

One minor security comment is that the readable-node discussion could more explicitly say that exposure of mLDP roots, peers, FEC-label bindings, RDs, and multicast group information may reveal topology and service information. The notification text already mentions rate limiting, which is good; it may be useful to mention that excessive mLDP FEC-event notifications could also create operational load.

Nits:
“copytight” should be “copyright”; 
“Operatiobal” should be “Operational”;
“exchnaged” should be “exchanged”; 
“yang” should be consistently capitalized as “YANG.”;

Best Regards, 
Linda Dunbar