Tom, It is how YANG does strong typing for identities. Please see Andy’s email
Dean > On May 10, 2016, at 2:17 PM, Nadeau Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yea, I agree that its probably worth giving a little more latitude when > helping people with models. 8) > > —Tom > > >> On May 10, 2016:12:55 PM, at 12:55 PM, Linda Dunbar >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Juergen, >> >> Of course, it is not confusing to you because you are in the box (vs. many >> of us are outside the box looking in). >> >> RFC 6020 doesn't say all identities have to have a sub-identity. >> >> >> My opinion only. >> >> >> Linda >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 10:38 AM >> To: Linda Dunbar >> Cc: [email protected]; '[email protected]'; Thomas D. Nadeau >> Subject: Re: Can you remove the "Identity acl-base" defined in >> draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-07 >> >> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:07:30PM +0000, Linda Dunbar wrote: >>> Juergen, >>> >>> If "acl-base" has some content more than the comment (i.e. the >>> description), then it makes sense. >>> >>> The comments in the "identity ipv4-acl" is enough to describe the identity. >>> Same with the identity ipv6-acl. >>> >>> I find it is very confusing to have the recursive reference of identity >>> (all of them are simply the description). >>> >> >> I fail to see anything confusing here. Did you read the relevant sections of >> RFC 6020? What is unclear about identities and how they work? >> >> /js >> >> -- >> Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH >> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany >> Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> > _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
