[netmod] Add "token" to rfc6991-bis? (was: Re: Add "node-instance-identifier" to rfc6991-bis?)

Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> Fri, 17 April 2020 15:17 UTC

Return-Path: <0100017188b6e098-3664a434-f84f-4cb0-9145-e92ed06a3bb5-000000@amazonses.watsen.net>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AC2D3A0ED1; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 08:17:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k9E7wGk536qu; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 08:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a48-94.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a48-94.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.48.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 681043A0FC7; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 08:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=224i4yxa5dv7c2xz3womw6peuasteono; d=amazonses.com; t=1587136619; h=From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:Feedback-ID; bh=lx7Q2tDTtyQovZ6zZhQ0Ej7oC1sr844JZgGjjmYGi7U=; b=dGGnWu/JlQcuVKAtimnOcBDHPpctCYLWQSXByCnux0PQHfqTf3YaaDwAP8utFE/I pl+7NG386jiJvb6IjXL8LBq/h6qr98dDxyl3q4TywRk3tbfNLrsMjI6QRUuDvcWbZfv Bgv9477OlNaMvv5IGpE5Xz8Zh5sl1opDSmq9mffQ=
From: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
Message-ID: <0100017188b6e098-3664a434-f84f-4cb0-9145-e92ed06a3bb5-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2429A199-E8DE-4214-B734-AF2BF651A3B5"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 15:16:58 +0000
In-Reply-To: <20200417081625.pjeup33y5wxqwt7k@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis@ietf.org
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
References: <0100017165acf391-5e3d197d-7911-4d7f-87d4-0ee95fcee855-000000@email.amazonses.com> <20200410200434.xisbzr5cuxzhmkpi@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <0100017165dadd72-00249a2b-8ea8-4d74-88d0-bf0579e817ae-000000@email.amazonses.com> <20200411064939.3lk5yl3gvac6zxlx@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <0100017185b30504-4afa0fb9-6e48-422b-b54d-91711211de95-000000@email.amazonses.com> <20200417081625.pjeup33y5wxqwt7k@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-SES-Outgoing: 2020.04.17-54.240.48.94
Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/-GJKGtJaI88rzOrF1-apnjOinMY>
Subject: [netmod] Add "token" to rfc6991-bis? (was: Re: Add "node-instance-identifier" to rfc6991-bis?)
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 15:17:42 -0000

[changing subject line]

> On Apr 17, 2020, at 4:16 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 01:13:54AM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
>> 
>>>>>> PS: the "token” type add discussion from before never completed (again, modeled after xsd:token)
>>>> 
>>>> What about this?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> What would this type be good for? Any models already using something
>>> like this?
>> 
>> 
>> Not in a standard model, that I’m aware of but, back at Juniper, I had a typedef for this that I used as a basis for so many things, but mostly things intended to be identifiers of sorts, whereby having whitespace didn’t make sense.
>> 
> 
> This type does not eliminate whitespace, it only reduces multiple
> consecutive whitespaces to one.

Leading/trailing whitespace :sigh:  Too pedantic much?

Please, think about the gazillion models where there is this:

    leaf name {
        type string;
        description ”An arbitrary name for the…”;
    }

It’s obvious the name shouldn’t contain paragraphs of text or, in general, non-printable characters of any sort, or preceding/trailing space characters.  Given this preponderance of this use case and the history of module-writers not defining the necessary pattern statements, a “token” type would be welcomed.   For instance:

    leaf name {
        type token;
        description ”An arbitrary name for the…”;
    }


Kent // contributor