Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis

"Yemin (Amy)" <amy.yemin@huawei.com> Tue, 06 November 2018 02:21 UTC

Return-Path: <amy.yemin@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 B08F01294D0 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 18:21:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 PjYX3y7nsmNE for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 18:21:47 -0800 (PST)
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 884AD12F295 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 18:21:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id C8998A0CCC77C; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 02:21:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEMM406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.214) by lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 02:21:45 +0000
Received: from DGGEMM528-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.232]) by DGGEMM406-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.3.20.214]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 10:21:33 +0800
From: "Yemin (Amy)" <amy.yemin@huawei.com>
To: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>, Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>, "balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com" <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>
CC: NETMOD WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis
Thread-Index: AdR1b1B75pZToCjlLEK5aT+9YAPiFwAB1JzU
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 02:21:33 +0000
Message-ID: <9C5FD3EFA72E1740A3D41BADDE0B461FCFA7803B@DGGEMM528-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9B0FC256@nkgeml513-mbs.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9B0FC256@nkgeml513-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: [10.126.171.236]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9C5FD3EFA72E1740A3D41BADDE0B461FCFA7803BDGGEMM528MBXchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/hnkPLWDJ6wXe8CqHtGy_kUkYk9o>
Subject: Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis
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: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 02:21:51 -0000

If the percentage is defined as following, as a author of draft-ye-ccamp-mw-topo-yang-02, we will be happy to use it.
But it's better to include in RFC6991bis, as percentage is a generic and widely used item.

BR,
Amy
________________________________
发件人: netmod [netmod-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Qin Wu [bill.wu@huawei.com]
发送时间: 2018年11月6日 9:25
收件人: Xufeng Liu; balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com
抄送: NETMOD WG
主题: Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis


Another case would be :


“

typedef percentage {

      type decimal64 {

         fraction-digits 5;

         range "0..100";

     }

   description "Percentage.";
   }
”
Which is defined ietf-connectionless-oam.yang module.

-Qin
发件人: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Xufeng Liu
发送时间: 2018年11月6日 3:49
收件人: balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com
抄送: NETMOD WG <netmod@ietf.org>
主题: Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis

The draft that asked for the percentage type is: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ye-ccamp-mw-topo-yang-02

They currently define:

              leaf availability {
                type decimal64 {
                  fraction-digits 4;
                  range "0..99.9999";
                }
                description "Availability level of the link";
              }

Thanks,
- Xufeng

On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 7:07 AM Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com<mailto:balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>> wrote:

+1 to percentage.

Balazs
On 2018. 11. 03. 3:44, Xufeng Liu wrote:
Remember that some draft asked for a type of percentage value to the nearest hundredth. Wondering if it can be put in.

Thanks,
- Xufeng

On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 11:39 AM tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com<mailto:ietfc@btconnect.com>> wrote:
---- Original Message -----
From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de<mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>>
To: "Kent Watsen" <kwatsen@juniper.net<mailto:kwatsen@juniper..net>>
Cc: <netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 10:14 AM

> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 12:05:17AM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
> >
> > >> In addition, it might be good to introduce [inet?] types for RFC
5322
> > >> (Internet Message Format) including perhaps:
> > >>
> > >>   - email-address        (addr-spec, per Section 3.4.1)
> > >>   - named-email-address  (name-addr, per Section 3.4)
> > >>
> > >
> > > Where are these used? Or have these already been used somewhere?
> >
> > I'm unaware of these ever having been used before.  I am working on
a private module for which I want to configure an email address.  After
some searching, I concluded that no such types have been defined, and
thus thought that they might be good candidates for addition.


We could defined a user-name, of the form localpart@domainpart as is
widely used to identify a user in operations but which does not, in my
experience, owe anything to i18n, just a straightforward character set;
yes it would not boil the ocean, but could be useful.  I am surprised
not to find such a definition somewhere in our 40 or so NETCONF I-Ds.

Tom Petch







> >
>
> It would be good to have strong use cases. I fear that defining this
> type won't be easy given that we also have internationalized email
> addresses (RFC 6530 provides an overview) and we might have to create
> a union of RFC 5322 addresses and "SMTPUTF8 (compliant) addresses".
>
> /js
>
> --
> 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<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod


_______________________________________________

netmod mailing list

netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<UrlBlockedError.aspx>

--

Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.

Senior Specialist

Mobile: +36-70-330-7909              email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com<mailto:Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com>