[Dime] comment on ABNFs in 3588bis

[Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen at iki.fi>]

Hi all,

The -12 revision of 3588bis still allows and actually gives an
example of using "* { AVP }", which in my opinion does not make
sense. Should we add a note under section 3.2 qual description
stating that "* { AVP }" is not possible based on the description
of a required AVP? I would add the following text to qual description:

  "If a required rule has a qualifier, then the value of min
   MUST be 1 if present."

If the above is acceptable, then we need to fix the example
following  the ABNF definitions:

   The following is a definition of a fictitious command code:

   Example-Request ::= < Diameter Header: 9999999, REQ, PXY >
                       { User-Name }
                     * { Origin-Host }
                   ^^^^
                     * [ AVP ]


Cheers,
	Jouni
_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
DiME at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime