Re: [netmod] rfc6991bis: yang:longitude, yang:latitude, yang:postal-code, yang:country-code

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Thu, 30 July 2020 13:28 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.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 E4EDE3A1138 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 06:28:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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 1sD1QK81pqZ2 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 06:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E55643A1137 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 06:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml722-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 7FCF1AF1F8CE394C3C58; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:28:21 +0100 (IST)
Received: from lhreml722-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.73) by lhreml722-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:28:21 +0100
Received: from DGGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.39) by lhreml722-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1913.5 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:28:21 +0100
Received: from DGGEML511-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.170]) by DGGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::b177:a243:7a69:5ab8%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0487.000; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:28:17 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] rfc6991bis: yang:longitude, yang:latitude, yang:postal-code, yang:country-code
Thread-Index: AdZmdIRn8PvTNhviSjqdKZcwCSEMyw==
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 13:28:17 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAAD8A8561@dggeml511-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.164.151.60]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/ebekXwoJXSpopKAa7MUGqdgJgA4>
Subject: Re: [netmod] rfc6991bis: yang:longitude, yang:latitude, yang:postal-code, yang:country-code
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: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 13:28:26 -0000

See geolocation definition in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-22 which defines longitude and latitude, altitude.
I know it is beneficial for future document to import these types from rfc6991bis instead of from te topo model.

-Qin
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Juergen Schoenwaelder
发送时间: 2020年7月18日 3:16
收件人: netmod@ietf.org
主题: [netmod] rfc6991bis: yang:longitude, yang:latitude, yang:postal-code, yang:country-code

  - It was suggested to add types for longitude, latitude, postal
    code, country-code. Do we go there or do we leave these for other
    modules to define? It seems such definitions should go into
    draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location.

  - Geo location is covered by draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location
    (so do nothing).

  - For country codes, there is ISO 3166, which defines two-letter,
    three-letter, and numeric country codes. I assume people wanted
    two-letter codes (as used in the DNS), i.e. they want DE and not
    DEU. But note that it is GB and not UK, i.e., what we commonly
    use in the DNS may not be exactly ISO 3166. (The devil is always
    in the details.)

  - For postal codes, it is unclear what the requirements are or what
    a proper definition for postal codes is. It is not entirely clear
    what the authoritative definition of the format of postal codes
    is, perhaps the Universal Postal Union.

  - Options: (i) do nothing or (ii) add a country code definition
    only or (iii) add both a country code definition and a postal
    code definition (which might be to some extend vague)

  - Proposal: do nothing
  
-- 
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