> From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]> > > > As I just replied in the other thread: The Bird implementation is > > going to have this facility no matter what we specify in the spec, but > > I'm fine with having it optional, or omitting it from the spec > > entirely, as long as we don't forbid having a key-use parameter :) > > It is my understanding that it's already effectively optional -- it can be > exported as read-only (paragraph 3.9 of the draft). I suggest we let Barbara > decide whether she wants to explicitly mark it as optional.
I find it confusing to have parameters an implementation has no use for. The "MAY choose to expose as read-only" is actually a bit awkward in this case, since ideally, users can add entries to the object (in which case it's weird to have read-only parameters set by the implementation). It's not disallowed -- just weird. I would like to mark them optional to implement. I don't think this would impact the YANG model (because the YANG model doesn't deal with the mandatory/optional to implement aspects of the spec)? Barbara _______________________________________________ Babel-users mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
