Hi Andy
On 9/12/2016 11:33 AM, Andy Bierman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Ladislav Lhotka > wrote:
> On 12 Sep 2016, at 15:33, Juergen Schoenwaelder
Hi
I find it is a bit strange that the must statement (7.5.3 and 7.5.4)
is organized under 7.5 The container statement. I would think it
makes more sense to be listed as a "Common Statements".
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-14.txt
7.5. The container Statement . . . . .
> The list's key nodes are encoded as subelements to the list's
>identifier element, in the same order as they are defined within the
>"key" statement.
I read as the sentence above already implies that an out of order key is an not
ok,
Otherwise why bother to specify it?
When
h variable assignment specified by the SetRequest-PDU should be
effected as if
simultaneously set with respect to all other assignments specified in
the same message."
I would expect the same rule applies for edit-config. That is , the
order is not
significant.
-Xiang Li
__