On 4/1/19, 1:30 PM, "Martin Bjorklund" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
The request was for a combined type that contains both an ip address
*and* a prefix length in one value. Hence the name
"ip-address-and-prefix-length" :)
Ok - I understand now.
I know that this type is convenient, esp. if you use it for manual
input, but I wonder if it really is good practice to squeeze two
values into one.
Agreed. It seems a prefix with a prefix length of 32 for IPv4 or 128 for IPv6
would allow specification. The convenience is primarily for mapping to CLI.
Thanks,
Acee
/martin
"Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ok, now I'm confused. I see that the ietf-inet-type model already has the
types ipv4-prefix and ipv6-prefix. How are these any different???
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> On 4/1/19, 12:31 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I believe the "address-" could be omitted from the type identifiers.
At least within the routing area, "ipv4-prefix" is unambiguous.
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> On 4/1/19, 12:14 PM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder"
<[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]>
wrote:
>
> This is the right time for this and I would call these
> ip-address-prefix, ipv4-address-prefix and ipv6-address
> prefix.
>
> /js
>
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 04:38:34PM +0200, Kristian Larsson wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > seeing that 6991 is up for a refresh I wonder if this would be
the time to
> > suggest the addition of a type for address-and-prefix-length,
for example
> > like 192.0.2.1/24?
> >
> > I find that it's the most natural way express the address and
prefix-length
> > to configure on an interface or for some other use. We
currently have an
> > ip-prefix type which allows CIDR style prefixes but since all
bits to the
> > right of the mask is to be 0 it is only possible to use for
describing the
> > IP prefix / network address itself - not the address of a host
in that
> > network.
> >
> > I actually wish the interface-ip modules would have used a
combined leaf for
> > these settings rather than the dual-leaf approach it currently
has, but I
> > suppose that ship has sailed :/
> >
> > Regardless, can we add such a type? Is this the document and
time to do it?
> > :)
> >
> > Kind regard,
> > Kristian.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen |
Germany
> Fax: +49 421 200 3103
<https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
