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

["Acee Lindem (acee)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Kristian,
Ok - I see that even though the existing ipv4-prefi type requires all 4 octets of the address, the description indicates that the host portion must be zero in the canonical format. Now that I understand your requirement, I'm in favor of adding a type that removes this restriction (i.e., the last statement in the description). 
Thanks,
Acee

On 4/1/19, 3:40 PM, "Kristian Larsson" <[e-mail]> wrote:

    
    
    On 2019-04-01 19:38, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
    > 
    > On 4/1/19, 1:30 PM, "Martin Bjorklund" <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > 
    >      Hi,
    >      
    >      The request was for a combined type that contains both an ip address
    >      *and* a prefix length in one value.  Hence the name
    >      "ip-address-and-prefix-length" :)
    > 
    > Ok - I understand now.
    >      
    >      I know that this type is convenient, esp. if you use it for manual
    >      input, but I wonder if it really is good practice to squeeze two
    >      values into one.
    > 
    > Agreed. It seems a prefix with a prefix length of 32 for IPv4 or 128 for IPv6 would allow specification.
    
    No, it does not. You must be referring to some other use case. I want to 
    configure the IP address and prefix-length on an interface. The 
    prefix-length naturally needs to align with the prefix-length / subnet 
    mask used on the network to which the interface is connected. If it is a 
    /24 network then the prefix-length needs to be 24. I can't just say it's 
    a /32 so I can enter this information - the router wouldn't understand 
    what is then connected to that network / interface and wouldn't be able 
    to route packets correctly.
    
    At the same time, I need to specify the exact IP address to be used by 
    this device on the interface, so I need to have bits set to the right of 
    the mask, thus I can't use current ip-prefix type.
    
    
    > The convenience is primarily for mapping to CLI.
    
    Heh, I don't understand what it has to do with CLI but since you're the 
    second person mentioning there must be some connection I don't see.
    
    Kind regards,
        Kristian.
    
    
    
    
    >      "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[e-mail]> wrote:
    >      > 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)" <[e-mail]> 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" <[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> 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
    >      >         > [e-mail]
    >      >         > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
    >      >
    >      >         --
    >      >         Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
    >      >         Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
    >      >         Fax:   [phone]         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
    >      >
    >      >         _______________________________________________
    >      >         netmod mailing list
    >      >         [e-mail]
    >      >         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
    >      >
    >      >
    >      >
    >      >
    >      > _______________________________________________
    >      > netmod mailing list
    >      > [e-mail]
    >      > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
    >      
    >