"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Acee, > > Having re-read the thread, I think that "ip-address-prefix" is going > to be confusing, since I had incorrectly assumed that the type being > defined was an IP prefix, but as you have pointed out there is already > a type for that. > > I think that we need to choose this name very carefully or otherwise I > suspect that folks will accidentally use the wrong type. > > So having the type as "ip-address-and-prefix-length" or > "ip-addr-and-prefix-len" now seems like a clearer choice to me.
The combined type really specifies (i) an ip address and (ii) an ip prefix. The prefix happens to be specified with a length indicator. So I think the name "ip-address-and-prefix" is the correct one. > I > think that I also now agree with Martin that this is really merging > two values into one leaf. And for the record (again, perhaps), I think this is a bad idea in general, and I am not sure an exception is needed in this case. /martin > Where is this type going to be used? Is it only used for configuring > host address/prefix? Or are there other uses cases as well? > > Thanks, > Rob > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Acee Lindem (acee) <[email protected]> > > Sent: 02 April 2019 16:52 > > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <[email protected]>; Martin Bjorklund > > <mbj@tail- > > f.com>; [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length > > > > Hi Rob, > > > > On 4/2/19, 11:37 AM, "netmod on behalf of Rob Wilton (rwilton)" > > <netmod- > > [email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: netmod <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Martin > > Bjorklund > > > Sent: 02 April 2019 13:47 > > > To: [email protected] > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length > > > > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > If you go back ~20 messages, my proposal was ip-address-prefix, > > > > ipv4-address-prefix, and ipv6-address-prefix. > > > > > > Do we agree that this type really specifies two values in one? If so > > > I think > > the > > > "and" is useful. > > > > Isn't an "IP prefix" made up of an "IP address" and a "prefix length"? > > > > This was my confusion as well since the ipv4-prefix and ipv6-prefix > > types > > (ietf-inet-types) have been used when they probably shouldn't have > > been. > > Note that they both have the constraint of not allowing the host bits > > to be set > > should they should be used in situations like interface address > > assignment. > > > > Excerpted from RFC6991 ipv4-type definition (note the last sentence): > > description > > "The ipv4-prefix type represents an IPv4 address prefix. > > The prefix length is given by the number following the > > slash character and must be less than or equal to 32. > > > > A prefix length value of n corresponds to an IP address > > mask that has n contiguous 1-bits from the most > > significant bit (MSB) and all other bits set to 0. > > > > The canonical format of an IPv4 prefix has all bits of > > the IPv4 address set to zero that are not part of the > > IPv4 prefix."; > > > > So, I think that the names above are probably right, or otherwise if > > you > > want the "and" then perhaps it should be > > "ip-address-and-prefix-length" - > > which seems clunky? > > > > I think the original suggestion of ipxx-address-prefix would be ok. > > > > Thanks, > > Acee > > > > Thanks, > > Rob > > > > > > > > > > Also note that the current text in RFC 6991 says: > > > > > > The ipv4-prefix type represents an IPv4 address prefix. > > > > > > so having a type ipv4-address-prefix for something that is not (only) > > > an > > > "ipv4 address prefix" is imo confusing. > > > > > > > > > /martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /js > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:13:09AM +0000, tom petch wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Jeff Tantsura" <[email protected]> > > > > > To: <[email protected]>; "Kristian Larsson" > > <[email protected]> > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 01, 2019 11:09 PM > > > > > > > > > > What Kristian has proposed makes sense, in favor. > > > > > > > > > > <tp> > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I support this idea and we should be able to come up with a > > > > > more user-friendly name; address-prefix or address-length ? > > > > > > > > > > Tom Petch > > > > > > > > > > p.s. > > > > > > > > > > identifier = (ALPHA / "_") > > > > > *(ALPHA / DIGIT / "_" / "-" / ".") > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > Jeff > > > > > On Apr 1, 2019, 1:09 PM -0700, Kristian Larsson > > > > > <[email protected]>, wrote: > > > > > > Hello Mahesh, > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2019-04-01 21:40, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 1, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail- > > f.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agree. The combination makes sense for CLI, but for modeling > > > > > > > the > > > > > address and prefix should be separate. > > > > > > > > > > > > Okay, then why do we have an ip-prefix data type at all? With > > the > > > > > > same line of argument you apply, it should be split up. > > > > > > > > > > > > So you're the third person bringing up CLI. I don't get this at > > > > > > all. I don't see how CLI are different from everything else. > > This > > > > > > is about > > > > > data > > > > > > modeling and data modeling is about expressing the world in a > > > > > > data > > > > > > modeling language. It's like painting a picture but instead of a > > > > > > brush you have a schema language like YANG. What do you see? > > > > > > Express it. It doesn't matter if the purpose is a CLI, a web > > page > > > > > > or just exposing it via NETCONF for another system to consume. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think address-and-prefix-length is natural. JUNOS uses this > > > > > > format. > > > > > XR > > > > > > uses this format (for IPv6 at least). Nokia SROS uses this > > > > > > format. > > > > > > > > > > > > We have written a bunch of models where the lack of this IMHO > > > > > > makes > > > > > them > > > > > > less elegant. I'd like for there to be an IETF standard data > > type > > > > > > to make those models more elegant. > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Kristian. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
