IETF Logo Mail Archive

[netmod] rfc6991bis: yang:percentage

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Fri, 17 July 2020 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
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 467FC3A0788 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 12:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 AwLA_TJn4eua for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 12:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from atlas5.jacobs-university.de (atlas5.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B9033A0766 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 12:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas5.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D07678 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 21:16:39 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from atlas5.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.198]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id HfIMvcrHtak6 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 21:16:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hermes.jacobs-university.de", Issuer "DFN-Verein Global Issuing CA" (verified OK)) by atlas5.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 21:16:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E477C20154 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 21:16:38 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10028) with ESMTP id GA0lIgLyrLpz; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 21:16:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.218.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A70C2200E4; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 21:16:38 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 21:16:38 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: netmod@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20200717191638.6wl3dqktcrnghuyl@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
Mail-Followup-To: netmod@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/cA-PdR3yCJlUPijWuvm59mHcSU0>
Subject: [netmod] rfc6991bis: yang:percentage
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 Jul 2020 19:16:42 -0000

  - Percentages are frequently used in YANG models but usages differ a
    lot in precision and range. It is not clear what the proper
    generic definition of a percentage type would be and whether it is
    worth having it.

    RFC 7950 example:

         typedef percent { type uint8 { range "0 .. 100"; } }

    RFC 8294:

         typedef percentage { type uint8 { range "0..100"; } }

    I-Ds:
         typedef percentage { type decimal64 { fraction-digits 5; } }
         typedef percentile { type decimal64 { fraction-digits 2; } }

    The yang catalogue seems to be down. :-(

  - Proposal: do not add a percentage type since it is trivial to
    define a context specific percentage type that matches range and
    precision requirements (and there is already a definition in RFC
    8294 for those who need exactly that definition).

-- 
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/>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email