> On Jan 27, 2017, at 11:23 AM, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > The "pyang --ietf" validator checks the statement order used in > data-def-stmts. > There is no guideline that says this is required. > RFC 7950 says canonical order is RECOMMENDED. > > 1) data-def sub-statement order > Proposal: add new last sentence to sec. 4.6, para 3: > > YANG data definition sub-statements SHOULD be specified in canonical order.
Not 6087bis specific … But is this IETF module specific? If not, should this not be checked by pyang for all modules. > > > 2) enum/bit statement ordering > > Proposal: add new para 2 to sec 5.11.3: > > The 'enum' statements within an 'enumeration' data type SHOULD be > specified in ascending order, based on the implied and/or explicit values > of the 'value' sub-statement. The 'bit' statements within a 'bits' data type > SHOULD be specified in ascending order, based on the implied and/or > explicit values of the 'position' sub-statement. Ditto. > > > > Andy > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanand...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
