Re: [Last-Call] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-yang-03

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> +1
> 
> I think it is better to have all three types explicitly in the value. Perhaps this could also be the default?
> 
> Lada
> [Bo] Please see if the definition below is correct:
>  typedef tcsplus-server-type {

Why not spell out tacacsplus?

>       type bits {
>         bit authentication {
>           description
>             "When set, the server is an authentication server.";
>         }
>         bit authorization {
>           description
>             "When set, the server is an authorization server.";
>         }
>         bit accounting {
>           description
>             "When set, the server is an accounting server.";
>         }
>         bit all {
>           description
>             "When set, the server can be all types of TACACS+ servers.";
>         }	

As Lada and Tom have said, I wouldn’t do “all” here.  With only three options, having them be explicitly listed is a good thing IMHO.

Joe

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux