On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 12:57:03PM +0100, Job Snijders wrote: >On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 11:50:57AM +0000, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) wrote: >> I was thinking one single configuration error message for each >> neighbor for which ingress or egress policy has not been set. > >What if it is intentional? Why consider it an error? > >I see no benefit, and it would make the draft non-compatible with >existing deployments aligned with the spirit of this draft. I don't see >how 'one sentence' will benefit the ultimate goal of this draft. Leave >that to the vendors.
Agreed, speaking with my vendor hat on, let's please leave these kind of implementation details to the implementer. These are the kind of things that I would define in an internal functional design specs. Greg -- Greg Hankins <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
