Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Which gets us back to the case you mention, which is one and the same 
vendor
    > (shudder) reusing serial numbers.

    > a) Are we aware of any actual instance of this ?

Yes... the bigger the org, the less anyone has any idea what's going on 
globally.
And then add in mergers/acquisitions.

    > If something like this would be a stupid but possible case, then
    > i would like us to write somehing short about this into rfc8366bis
    > so readers can understand why this differentiation by KeyIdentifier
    > may be useful to have.

I agree that we could clarify the use of this field.

One thing that I don't like is that it's hard to write/edit/revise the
"description" field in the YANG, and more and more, I'd like to just say,
"See RFCXXXX section Y.Z" in the description.

That might not fly as a process.

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide




Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to