Forwarding to the authors and WG
Regards, Benoit
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Forwarding to the authors and WG
Regards, Benoit
I am guessing that the authors intended the addition of the text
emphasizing that the no-zone typedefs are derived general typedef
addresses the difference in the patterns.
Is there a YANG rule that says tat if typedef X is derived from
Joel,
this is specified in the third paragraph of section 9.4.6 of RFC 6020:
9.4.6. The pattern Statement
The pattern statement, which is an optional substatement to the
type statement, takes as an argument a regular expression string,
as defined in [XSD-TYPES]. It is used to
Thank you Juergen. I see that the pattern statement is therefore correct.
And presumably it is a judgment call as to hw to write te new pattern to
restrict the old one. Personally, I find a pattern statement that
covers a whole lot of other things, but that happens when combined with
the
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Joel M. Halpern j...@joelhalpern.comwrote:
I am guessing that the authors intended the addition of the text
emphasizing that the no-zone typedefs are derived general typedef addresses
the difference in the patterns.
Is there a YANG rule that says tat if
I am guessing that the authors intended the addition of the text
emphasizing that the no-zone typedefs are derived general typedef
addresses the difference in the patterns.
Is there a YANG rule that says tat if typedef X is derived from typedef
Y then the string for X must match the pattern
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-01
