Re: [netmod] inet:ipv4-address
The zone identifiers you find in practice are either numeric (interface indexes) or symbolic interface names, this is also stated in the description. The zone index is used to disambiguate identical address values. For link-local addresses, the zone index will typically be the interface index number or the name of an interface. If the zone index is not present, the default zone of the device will be used. in other words, its 'not usually very long' but there is not concrete restriction. Note that the interface name leaf in RFC 8343 also has no restriction. /js On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 02:02:01PM +, Don Fedyk wrote: > Thanks - In DetNet we have an ID in progress we should change from type > inet:ip-address to inet:ip-address-no-zone. I did not know that. > > My other thought is since the ipv4-address (with the zone) is of format > "127.1.1.0%AndAUnterminatedString..", shouldn't every use of ipv4-address > type also have a maximum length restriction? - If not - what controls the > Maximum length? It is good practice to have maximums on input strings and I > have come across xml validation rules that require exceptions for long > strings - and the definition long is not usually very long. > > Thanks > Don > > -Original Message- > From: netmod On Behalf Of Christian Hopps > Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 2:46 AM > To: Ladislav Lhotka > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] inet:ipv4-address > > > Well you were right, ipv4-address is used all over the place and it probably > shouldn't have been. Chalk another one up to sticking to the rules even when > it harms us. > > Thanks, > Chris. > > Ladislav Lhotka writes: > > > On 09. 05. 21 1:26, Christian Hopps wrote: > >> > >> How did we end up with "ipv4-address" being a zoned IPv4 address and > >> having to use the non-obvious "ipv4-address-no-zone" type to get the > >> IPv4 address type used by everyone, everywhere? > > > > It was discussed e.g. in these threads: > > > > * > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/?gbt=1=subject%3A%22 > > draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6021-bis-01%20(20130204)%22 > > > > * > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/?gbt=1=gcMx6c-NF > > t2UCbtBFi7BsUWf0EU > > > > Lada > > > >> > >> I see that OpenConfig chose the opposite meaning for the "obvious" > >> names (i.e., you want zoned addresses you use "-zoned" types e.g., > >> "ipv6-address-zoned"). > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Chris. > >> > >> ___ > >> netmod mailing list > >> netmod@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > > ___ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > > ___ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > 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 netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
Re: [netmod] inet:ipv4-address
Thanks - In DetNet we have an ID in progress we should change from type inet:ip-address to inet:ip-address-no-zone. I did not know that. My other thought is since the ipv4-address (with the zone) is of format "127.1.1.0%AndAUnterminatedString..", shouldn't every use of ipv4-address type also have a maximum length restriction? - If not - what controls the Maximum length? It is good practice to have maximums on input strings and I have come across xml validation rules that require exceptions for long strings - and the definition long is not usually very long. Thanks Don -Original Message- From: netmod On Behalf Of Christian Hopps Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 2:46 AM To: Ladislav Lhotka Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] inet:ipv4-address Well you were right, ipv4-address is used all over the place and it probably shouldn't have been. Chalk another one up to sticking to the rules even when it harms us. Thanks, Chris. Ladislav Lhotka writes: > On 09. 05. 21 1:26, Christian Hopps wrote: >> >> How did we end up with "ipv4-address" being a zoned IPv4 address and >> having to use the non-obvious "ipv4-address-no-zone" type to get the >> IPv4 address type used by everyone, everywhere? > > It was discussed e.g. in these threads: > > * > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/?gbt=1=subject%3A%22 > draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6021-bis-01%20(20130204)%22 > > * > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/?gbt=1=gcMx6c-NF > t2UCbtBFi7BsUWf0EU > > Lada > >> >> I see that OpenConfig chose the opposite meaning for the "obvious" >> names (i.e., you want zoned addresses you use "-zoned" types e.g., >> "ipv6-address-zoned"). >> >> Thanks, >> Chris. >> >> ___ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
Re: [netmod] inet:ipv4-address
Well you were right, ipv4-address is used all over the place and it probably shouldn't have been. Chalk another one up to sticking to the rules even when it harms us. Thanks, Chris. Ladislav Lhotka writes: On 09. 05. 21 1:26, Christian Hopps wrote: How did we end up with "ipv4-address" being a zoned IPv4 address and having to use the non-obvious "ipv4-address-no-zone" type to get the IPv4 address type used by everyone, everywhere? It was discussed e.g. in these threads: * https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/?gbt=1=subject%3A%22draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6021-bis-01%20(20130204)%22 * https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/?gbt=1=gcMx6c-NFt2UCbtBFi7BsUWf0EU Lada I see that OpenConfig chose the opposite meaning for the "obvious" names (i.e., you want zoned addresses you use "-zoned" types e.g., "ipv6-address-zoned"). Thanks, Chris. ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
Re: [netmod] inet:ipv4-address
On 09. 05. 21 1:26, Christian Hopps wrote: > > How did we end up with "ipv4-address" being a zoned IPv4 address and > having to use the non-obvious "ipv4-address-no-zone" type to get the > IPv4 address type used by everyone, everywhere? It was discussed e.g. in these threads: * https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/?gbt=1=subject%3A%22draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6021-bis-01%20(20130204)%22 * https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/?gbt=1=gcMx6c-NFt2UCbtBFi7BsUWf0EU Lada > > I see that OpenConfig chose the opposite meaning for the "obvious" names > (i.e., you want zoned addresses you use "-zoned" types e.g., > "ipv6-address-zoned"). > > Thanks, > Chris. > > ___ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
[netmod] inet:ipv4-address
How did we end up with "ipv4-address" being a zoned IPv4 address and having to use the non-obvious "ipv4-address-no-zone" type to get the IPv4 address type used by everyone, everywhere? I see that OpenConfig chose the opposite meaning for the "obvious" names (i.e., you want zoned addresses you use "-zoned" types e.g., "ipv6-address-zoned"). Thanks, Chris. ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
