My take is that arbitrary limites are worse than no limits. Robust implementations will reject values that go beyond certain implementation and platform specific limits.
If anything makes sense to standardize, then it is the minimum lengths that must be supported, for which we do not really have formal syntax. /js On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 12:38:13PM +0000, Italo Busi wrote: > I have seen the comment from Tom about the unrestricted string in YANG on > other drafts in WG LC or WG adoption poll and I would like to understand what > is the position of the Netmod WG on this issue > > > Using unrestricted string is quite common practice in existing IETF standard > YANG models, also as in key attributes (e.g., see RFC8343). However, the > comments looks valid and it is worthwhile investigating it further > From the previous discussion I have understood that Martin does not think > this is an issue while Andy agrees with Tom … > > I have a mixed feeling about the resolution but I think this is something to > be documented either in RFC7950 (update) or in RFC8407 (update) > > For integers, RFC7950 defines different built-in types for 8-bit, 16-bit and > 64-bit integers, while for string there is only one type and the length > sub-statement is optional > > While it is true that unrestricted strings can cause an implementation to run > out of memory, it is also true that in some cases it is not trivial to define > the maximum length for a string attribute > > Moreover, I am not sure whether restricting the strings would solve the out > of memory: what happens if a huge YANG list is configured? > > What is your view/opinion about using the string type in IETF standard YANG > models? > > Thanks, Italo > > From: Andy Bierman <[email protected]> > Sent: mercoledì 21 dicembre 2022 00:30 > To: Martin Björklund <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [netmod] naming scope of a grouping which uses a grouping > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 5:15 AM Martin Björklund > <[email protected]<mailto:mbj%[email protected]>> wrote: > tom petch <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > From: Martin Björklund <[email protected]<mailto:mbj%[email protected]>> > > Sent: 19 December 2022 12:18 > > To: tom petch > > > > tom petch <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-12 > > > defines a grouping sap-list which uses grouping sap-entry. The groupings > > > are intended for import by service specific modules. The uses does not > > > include a prefix; should it? > > > > From a YANG perspective this is correct. Since it references a > > grouping in the local module, the prefix is optional. > > > > <tp> > > But it will not be the local module when it is used in other modules which > > is the only reason it is a grou[ing > > It doesn't matter how sap-list is used; it is well-defined in the > module ietf-sap-ntw. See section 5.4 in RFC 7950. > > > /martin > > > > > > module ietf-sap-vpn > > prefix sap-vpn > > import ietf-sap-ntw > > prefix sap > > container sap-l2vpn > > > > list l2vpn-service > > uses sap:sap-list > > ..... > > > > Does it need to know where to find sap-entry which sap-list 'uses' without > > a prefix? > > > > Tom Petch > > > > > The module also has my favourite YANG construct, an unrestricted string > > > as a YANG key. > > > > I don't think that this is a problem. Or rather, if the theory is > > that we need to have restricted length on strings b/c otherwise an > > implementation may run out memory, then I don't think this solves that > > problem. But perhaps there is some other reason? > > > > There is an argument to be made that it is better to pick a reasonable length > and a reasonable character set for an administrative string (going back to > SnmpAdminString) > That way, every implementation MUST support the same set of strings (modulo > resource errors). > > I have the same reaction as Tom when I see 'string' as a key. > Really? The server accepts zero-length identifiers, all-whitespace > identifiers, and much worse... > Probably not. > > > > > > /martin > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > Copying Martin as he performed a YANG Doctor review earlier in 2022. > > > > > > Tom Petch > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Jürgen Schönwälder Constructor 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
