Robert Wilton wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> Thanks for confirming. I had only checked section 1.1.
>
> Should this change in semantics be listed in "1.1. Summary of Changes
> from RFC 6020"?
Ok.
/martin
>
> My concern being that this change could break existing clients if they
> are currently u
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 7:16 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Behcet Sarikaya writes:
>
>> Hi Lada,
>>
>> When trying to validate NETCONF get reply in Appendix D, I ran into a
>> problem:
>
> I assume you mean Appendix D in RFC 7223.
>
No I meant your draft. Yes, RFC 7223 also has a similar annex,
Hi,
This draft has been out a little bit, but we haven't seen any
significant comments on it. We'd definitely like to hear from the WG on
this.
Note, per the draft:
This version is a major change from the prior version and this change
was enabled by the work on the Structural Mount/YSDL. And we
Behcet Sarikaya writes:
> Hi Lada,
>
> When trying to validate NETCONF get reply in Appendix D, I ran into a
> problem:
I assume you mean Appendix D in RFC 7223.
>
> This annex introduces a namespace iana-if-types and none of the YANG
> modules of ietf-routing-cfg is dependent on this namespac
Hi Martin,
Thanks for confirming. I had only checked section 1.1.
Should this change in semantics be listed in "1.1. Summary of Changes
from RFC 6020"?
My concern being that this change could break existing clients if they
are currently using sets as the underlying data structure to represe
Robert Wilton wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> In Yang 1.0, all values in a leaf-list must be unique (i.e. section
> 7.7. states "The values in a leaf-list MUST be unique.". I.e. a
> leaf-list actually represents an ordered set rather than a list.
>
> In 6020bis#10, section 7.7, this statement has been
Hi Martin,
In Yang 1.0, all values in a leaf-list must be unique (i.e. section 7.7.
states "The values in a leaf-list MUST be unique.". I.e. a leaf-list
actually represents an ordered set rather than a list.
In 6020bis#10, section 7.7, this statement has been changed to "In
configuration da
Dear Sir or Madam,
I would like to know if *ietf-yang-types.yang (**revision 2013-07-15) *supports
ipv6 arbitrary mask.I see that this is kind of accomplished with
dotted-quad in ipv4, but I wonder if there is something for ipv6?
Thank you in advance
__
