Yes, the intention is not to change the semantic of bar but to introduce a more “restricted” identity from which bar could be derived
Something like introducing an identity for italian-car in between car and Ferrari identities Italo From: Jernej Tuljak <[email protected]> Sent: lunedì 30 gennaio 2023 08:51 To: Italo Busi <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [netmod] Changing an identity base On 27/01/2023 17:54, Italo Busi wrote: According to section 11 of RFC7950, the following change is considered BC: o A "base" statement may be added to an "identity" statement. Since, as explained in section 7.18.2 of RFC7950, the derivation of identities is transitive, my understanding is that replacing a "base" statement with new "base" statement which is derived from the previous one is also a BC change. Considering the example below, the NEW (A) change is BC according to section 11 of RFC7950. However, NEW (B) is equivalent to NEW (A), since the new baz is derived from foo, and therefore it is also a BC change. Is my understanding correct? I'd like a clarification regarding this as well. Is "NEWB:bar" definition semantically equivalent to "OLD:bar" definition? Jernej Thanks, Italo OLD identity foo {} identity bar { base foo; } NEW (A) identity foo {} identity baz { base foo } identity bar { base foo; base baz; } NEW (B) identity foo {} identity baz { base foo } identity bar { base baz; } _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
