should have read "or it supports more than 32" > On Oct 8, 2019, at 5:53 AM, Christian Hopps <[email protected]> wrote: > > This strikes me as one of these artificial limits that gains us almost > nothing (what if the platform supports less than 32 or it supports 32?), and > creates these backward incompatible YANG issues (ranges that have to change) > that are part of what is driving the complexity in the YANG versioning stuff. > Why don't we just have a no range u16 or a 1..max range? > Thanks, > Chris. > >> On Oct 7, 2019, at 12:44 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> grouping spf-parameters { >>> container spf-control { >>> leaf paths { >>> if-feature max-ecmp; >>> type uint16 { >>> range "1..32"; >>> } >> >> Why is this a uint16 rather than a uint8? >> >> It definitely could be uint8. >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
