Re: [netmod] [yang-doctors] Length on keys in YANG

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

Jeff,

From: Jeff Haas <[e-mail]>
Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 10:25 AM
To: Acee Lindem <[e-mail]>
Cc: Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail]>, tom petch <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, YANG Doctors <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] [netmod] Length on keys in YANG

Acee,



On Oct 5, 2022, at 10:18 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

It may even be a matter of having a few useful typedefs:

yang-key32 (length 1..32)
yang-key64 (length 1..64)
yang-key128 (length 1..128)
yang-key256 (length 1..256)

I agree in principle. Why wouldn’t these be string32, etc, since the leaves in question are of type string. We don’t need “yang-“ since they will be prefixed with “yang-types:” or some other module.

I'm supremely uninterested in the color of the bike shed. :-)  I find minor value is having the word "key" present to cover the use case, but certainly could see use cases where a leaf might also want to limit the content size to some well known sizes.

This was exactly my point. No need to get defensive.

Acee

While I certainly could be the one that authors the underlying draft, there are many who are more deeply involved in daily YANG work that are probably more appropriate parties.  Mostly, I'm hoping this discussion gets someone interested enough to write the trivial draft and hopefully start socializing it in IETF YANG draft reviews.



-- Jeff