Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length

Michael Rehder <Michael.Rehder@Amdocs.com> Mon, 01 April 2019 18:09 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Rehder@amdocs.com>
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 CDA2612011C for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 11:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.689
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.689 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=amdocs.onmicrosoft.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 ztNWr8oLf79r for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 11:09:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.amdocs.com (stlmail1.amdocs.com [69.150.27.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B61CD120187 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 11:09:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unknown (HELO USSTLEXCHCAS01.corp.amdocs.com) ([10.26.49.50]) by stlmail1.corp.amdocs.com with ESMTP; 01 Apr 2019 13:09:03 -0500
Received: from USSTLEXCHCAS02.corp.amdocs.com (10.26.51.232) by USSTLEXCHCAS01.corp.amdocs.com (10.26.51.231) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.1531.3; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:09:02 -0500
Received: from USSTLEXCHEDGE02.corp.amdocs.com (10.25.2.168) by USSTLEXCHCAS02.corp.amdocs.com (10.26.51.232) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.1531.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:09:02 -0500
Received: from EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.26.125.4) by msgedge.amdocs.com (10.26.125.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.1531.3; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:09:02 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Amdocs.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-amdocs-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=s8Kb42IF5/1o6iAGpaDAsHZJcdXhu9TCm7Y/Na96YTE=; b=jYkjcVmZlY9/KtYGoTpnNRG37s1puhrtxJXFaq0vd2LrH3nD6tn54cSAwlp8vLtjZc32s+LJnPzlYWlB9xawjGNCLf0b66ZN+YIONhOec2BJdBwa8H0X++BgBo/3ufOpOP7fATJv8o1O96QsNakM9qe0c5aknHSpCf/GQC9akrk=
Received: from AM0PR06MB4083.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (52.133.57.154) by AM0PR06MB5187.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (20.178.21.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1750.15; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 18:09:00 +0000
Received: from AM0PR06MB4083.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::290a:e8e5:2d22:6a0f]) by AM0PR06MB4083.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::290a:e8e5:2d22:6a0f%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1750.017; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 18:09:00 +0000
From: Michael Rehder <Michael.Rehder@Amdocs.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
CC: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length
Thread-Index: AdTosYjylcpBC/maRr6LoEbsZjHDygAA7NoAAAAcX5A=
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 18:08:59 +0000
Message-ID: <AM0PR06MB40839BE301B907E1305FAED9E7550@AM0PR06MB4083.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
References: <AM0PR06MB4083C2D7B820D01C50C1F7CDE7550@AM0PR06MB4083.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com> <20190401.200340.285358162315609400.mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190401.200340.285358162315609400.mbj@tail-f.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Rehder@Amdocs.com;
x-originating-ip: [192.95.160.116]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 6472e183-ddc4-4e85-11fd-08d6b6cd1da0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(5600139)(711020)(4605104)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:AM0PR06MB5187;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM0PR06MB5187:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 3
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <AM0PR06MB5187C54F2472069A6371DECEE7550@AM0PR06MB5187.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 0994F5E0C5
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(136003)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(366004)(396003)(54094003)(199004)(189003)(13464003)(66066001)(6436002)(52536014)(2906002)(7696005)(81156014)(86362001)(68736007)(76176011)(476003)(6506007)(71190400001)(6116002)(316002)(7736002)(3846002)(486006)(106356001)(8676002)(256004)(53546011)(81166006)(229853002)(5660300002)(71200400001)(6246003)(11346002)(74316002)(53936002)(55016002)(30864003)(305945005)(8936002)(99286004)(105586002)(6916009)(102836004)(25786009)(72206003)(14454004)(4326008)(446003)(478600001)(6306002)(33656002)(186003)(97736004)(966005)(26005)(9686003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:AM0PR06MB5187; H:AM0PR06MB4083.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: Amdocs.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: f9xkwtLsiEWxg//eZIhzy2yeTHukEskbtmqWPab3Ri+rwvVzIhUIxbCcAIAhB7SVKu2ACEkLl1e1htu0B2k7t7y+FR+gVozc86W1k7C+AVj82z8AooMWdE4Z6PcKMEFnxN60mupjjivtFATWQyPllIhWTxzeu7IUwo0P4DG5tpW9U7dtH6UQtdVgwwlD4Okvm5c5ae2g6dVTnfRQvePxWj+KoXPnSFUgETZEXBMZWHdQe5HbmzkTdxGg2B4dqeFXD8ZZJyXYkpsWpjJtrhXQM9S38SQQiJ8+Dh3+pkpidu5O0QBCsFJtfmNXZRSVHOMOBmiRKJYlqr0m3nlZsEO808d5eTmOS9OBKBUaAvfqYJZD0yre+4Fo/jINwHH8eseNFVu4hX3oeJ9idC4o6NtJNH7hgb5X4Esmo6LWvK2z41g=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 6472e183-ddc4-4e85-11fd-08d6b6cd1da0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Apr 2019 18:08:59.9983 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: c8eca3ca-1276-46d5-9d9d-a0f2a028920f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM0PR06MB5187
X-OriginatorOrg: amdocs.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/79y72Yz3mWIaZ_2VfN-9Rz2f5r8>
Subject: Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length
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: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 18:09:09 -0000

Yes, correct, my misremembering (I'm working also with JSONSchema which doesn't have that).

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:mbj@tail-f.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 2:04 PM
> To: Michael Rehder <Michael.Rehder@Amdocs.com>
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Michael Rehder <Michael.Rehder@Amdocs.com> wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Note also that the ietf pattern regexp are not anchored so "
> > junk192.168.1.1"
> > and
> > "    192.168.1.1   "
> > Are accepted.
> 
> No, this is not correct.  YANG uses the XSD "dialect" of regular expressions.  In
> this dialect, all patterns are implicitly anchored.
> 
> 
> /martin
> 
> > I don't know why they are unanchored. This makes them unusable in my
> > view.
> >
> > As a result I've written my own regxp and a somewhat elaborate MUST
> > clause for canonical format check but a specific type would be better.
> > Another perspective is to ensure there is some way to avoid using MUST
> > to simply constrain type.
> > Has that ever been discussed?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Mike
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > --
> > >
> > > Message: 1
> > > Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 16:38:34 +0200
> > > From: Kristian Larsson <kristian@spritelink.net>
> > > To: netmod@ietf.org
> > > Subject: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length
> > > Message-ID: <10d3413c-df96-6e7d-df82-5542bb02348d@spritelink.net>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > seeing that 6991 is up for a refresh I wonder if this would be the
> > > time to suggest the addition of a type for
> > > address-and-prefix-length, for example like 192.0.2.1/24?
> > >
> > > I find that it's the most natural way express the address and
> > > prefix-length to configure on an interface or for some other use. We
> > > currently have an ip-prefix type which allows CIDR style prefixes
> > > but since all bits to the right of the mask is to be 0 it is only
> > > possible to use for describing the IP prefix / network address
> > > itself - not the address of a host in that network.
> > >
> > > I actually wish the interface-ip modules would have used a combined
> > > leaf for these settings rather than the dual-leaf approach it
> > > currently has, but I suppose that ship has sailed :/
> > >
> > > Regardless, can we add such a type? Is this the document and time to
> > > do it? :)
> > >
> > > Kind regard,
> > >     Kristian.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 2
> > > Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 18:13:21 +0200
> > > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
> > > To: Kristian Larsson <kristian@spritelink.net>
> > > Cc: <netmod@ietf.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length
> > > Message-ID:
> > > 	<20190401161321.seiodlfsmjjvjcp5@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> > >
> > > This is the right time for this and I would call these
> > > ip-address-prefix, ipv4- address-prefix and ipv6-address prefix.
> > >
> > > /js
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 04:38:34PM +0200, Kristian Larsson wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > seeing that 6991 is up for a refresh I wonder if this would be the
> > > > time to suggest the addition of a type for
> > > > address-and-prefix-length, for example like 192.0.2.1/24?
> > > >
> > > > I find that it's the most natural way express the address and
> > > > prefix-length to configure on an interface or for some other use.
> > > > We currently have an ip-prefix type which allows CIDR style
> > > > prefixes but since all bits to the right of the mask is to be 0 it
> > > > is only possible to use for describing the IP prefix / network
> > > > address itself - not the address of a host in that network.
> > > >
> > > > I actually wish the interface-ip modules would have used a
> > > > combined leaf for these settings rather than the dual-leaf
> > > > approach it currently has, but I suppose that ship has sailed :/
> > > >
> > > > Regardless, can we add such a type? Is this the document and time
> > > > to do it?
> > > > :)
> > > >
> > > > Kind regard,
> > > >    Kristian.
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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/>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 3
> > > Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 16:31:12 +0000
> > > From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
> > > To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>de>,
> > > 	"Kristian Larsson" <kristian@spritelink.net>
> > > Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length
> > > Message-ID: <F1537180-6BF3-40C7-BCFA-3AAE0290AE9D@cisco.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > >
> > > I believe the "address-" could be omitted from the type identifiers.
> > > At least within the routing area, "ipv4-prefix" is unambiguous.
> > > Thanks,
> > > Acee
> > >
> > > ?On 4/1/19, 12:14 PM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder"
> > > <netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-
> > > university.de> wrote:
> > >
> > >     This is the right time for this and I would call these
> > >     ip-address-prefix, ipv4-address-prefix and ipv6-address
> > >     prefix.
> > >
> > >     /js
> > >
> > >     On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 04:38:34PM +0200, Kristian Larsson wrote:
> > >     > Hello,
> > >     >
> > >     > seeing that 6991 is up for a refresh I wonder if this would be the
> > >     > time to
> > >     > suggest the addition of a type for address-and-prefix-length, for
> > >     > example
> > >     > like 192.0.2.1/24?
> > >     >
> > >     > I find that it's the most natural way express the address and
> > >     > prefix-length
> > >     > to configure on an interface or for some other use. We currently have
> > >     > an
> > >     > ip-prefix type which allows CIDR style prefixes but since all bits to
> > >     > the
> > >     > right of the mask is to be 0 it is only possible to use for describing
> > >     > the
> > >     > IP prefix / network address itself - not the address of a host in that
> > >     > network.
> > >     >
> > >     > I actually wish the interface-ip modules would have used a combined
> > >     > leaf
> > > for
> > >     > these settings rather than the dual-leaf approach it currently has,
> > >     > but I
> > >     > suppose that ship has sailed :/
> > >     >
> > >     > Regardless, can we add such a type? Is this the document and time to
> > >     > do it?
> > >     > :)
> > >     >
> > >     > Kind regard,
> > >     >    Kristian.
> > >     >
> > >     > _______________________________________________
> > >     > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 4
> > > Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 17:23:37 +0000
> > > From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
> > > To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>de>,
> > > 	"Kristian Larsson" <kristian@spritelink.net>
> > > Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length
> > > Message-ID: <A0F7987F-AA67-4A63-8FEE-3B74B5B47CF1@cisco.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > >
> > > Ok, now I'm confused. I see that the ietf-inet-type model already
> > > has the types ipv4-prefix and ipv6-prefix. How are these any
> > > different???
> > > Thanks,
> > > Acee
> > >
> > > ?On 4/1/19, 12:31 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >     I believe the "address-" could be omitted from the type
> > >     identifiers. At least
> > > within the routing area, "ipv4-prefix" is unambiguous.
> > >     Thanks,
> > >     Acee
> > >
> > >     On 4/1/19, 12:14 PM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder"
> > > <netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-
> > > university.de> wrote:
> > >
> > >         This is the right time for this and I would call these
> > >         ip-address-prefix, ipv4-address-prefix and ipv6-address
> > >         prefix.
> > >
> > >         /js
> > >
> > >         On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 04:38:34PM +0200, Kristian Larsson wrote:
> > >         > Hello,
> > >         >
> > >         > seeing that 6991 is up for a refresh I wonder if this would be the
> > >         > time to
> > >         > suggest the addition of a type for address-and-prefix-length, for
> > >         > example
> > >         > like 192.0.2.1/24?
> > >         >
> > >         > I find that it's the most natural way express the address and
> > >         > prefix-
> > > length
> > >         > to configure on an interface or for some other use. We currently
> > >         > have an
> > >         > ip-prefix type which allows CIDR style prefixes but since all bits
> > >         > to the
> > >         > right of the mask is to be 0 it is only possible to use for
> > >         > describing the
> > >         > IP prefix / network address itself - not the address of a host in
> > >         > that
> > >         > network.
> > >         >
> > >         > I actually wish the interface-ip modules would have used a
> > > combined leaf for
> > >         > these settings rather than the dual-leaf approach it currently has,
> > >         > but I
> > >         > suppose that ship has sailed :/
> > >         >
> > >         > Regardless, can we add such a type? Is this the document and time
> > >         > to do
> > > it?
> > >         > :)
> > >         >
> > >         > Kind regard,
> > >         >    Kristian.
> > >         >
> > >         > _______________________________________________
> > >         > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > netmod mailing list
> > > netmod@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > End of netmod Digest, Vol 133, Issue 2
> > > **************************************
> > This email and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> > confidential and subject to the Amdocs Email Terms of Service, which
> > you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-terms-of-service
> > <https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-terms-of-service>
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > netmod@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> >
This email and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs Email Terms of Service, which you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-terms-of-service <https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-terms-of-service>