Re: [Idr] Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt

[Geoff Huston <[e-mail]>]

> On 4 Nov. 2016, at 9:31 pm, Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 5:10 AM, Geoff Huston <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 4 Nov. 2016, at 6:56 pm, Job Snijders <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> Given the above context, do you have a suggestion other then "pick eiher
>>> a colon-delimited or bracketed"? My personal preference would be to
>>> keep the original text.
>>> 
>> 
>> I think you make a clear SHOULD support for a particular representation of the
>> triplet, which makes other representations still ok, but there is a clear preference
>> for interoperability that says “clearly state a preferred format for representating
>> these values".
> 
> I believe the intent of saying it's an ordered tuple of Global Admin, Local Admin 1, Local Admin 2 is sufficient.
> 
> If you want to define delimiters, go write a yang module.
> 
> -- Jeff
> 

For me thats a bit like saying that an IPv5 address is represented as a sequence of decimal values representing 8-bit values. Its not enough to be useful without the delimiter.

I like the way we are now spending time on the one part of the draft that is truly of least relevant.

So if all this generates too much angst then drop the entire canonical representation part from the draft and let coders do what they want. Like extended communities, no doubt there will be some canonical format emerge from this process in time.