Hi,
[email protected] wrote: > Hi Martin, all, > > Please remember that RFC8407 includes already the following: > > == > "when" statement evaluation is generally more expensive than > "if-feature" or "choice" statements > == Yes, this is fine. It is something that the module designer can keep in mind when designing the module (actually, the text says "MAY be considered"). > I understand that you may have a concern with the MUST NOT language, > but we do need some guidance for such constraints. If there are cases > where having both makes sense, we can transform the MUST NOT to SHOULD > NOT with a guidance when it is OK to maintain that constraint. I don't agree that we should have SHOULD NOT either. It feels very arbitrary to have such a statement for this particular construct. To be clear, I think the paragraph: Some modules use "case + when" construct such as shown in the example below. Such a construct MUST be avoided by removing the "when" statement or using a "container" outside the "choice". and the example that follows should be removed. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
