Add maxReceivedBgpRoutePrefixesV6 to L3BaseGuidance schema#55
Add maxReceivedBgpRoutePrefixesV6 to L3BaseGuidance schema#55bpescato-amazon wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
- Add optional IPv6 BGP route prefix limit field (maxReceivedBgpRoutePrefixesIpv6) - Make maxReceivedBgpRoutePrefixes required and clarify as IPv4 - Make asnRanges, vlanRanges, mtuRanges required - IPv6 field falls back to the IPv4 value when omitted
| also used as the IPv6 value. | ||
| format: int32 | ||
| type: integer | ||
| required: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is technically a breaking change in the generated libraries (because it gets rid of the "Has*" style functions, at least in the Go generator).
I'm also wondering if there's a value to required here since this is a response. There's not much the client can do if the server omits it, and logically it maintains the same behavior of no value -> 0 / empty list.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, not following exactly which part is beraking. Is it the new "required" portion?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah it's the 'required' section that's flagging for me. I'm mostly interested in how we want to describe semantics if a server omits a required field in a response body in this case?
2 participants
Issue #, if available:
Description of changes:
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.