Re: [netmod] WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-11

[Martin Björklund <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I didn't find any discussion about the new percent types in the list
archives.  Do we really need three types for percent?  We can now
express 4294967295 percent, but not 10.5 percent.

The new tables look good.  s/6020/6021/g though.



/martin


Jürgen Schönwälder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 12:12:04PM +0000, maqiufang (A) wrote:
> 
> > I have only one comment: It seems that Table 2 doesn’t list all the
> > types defined in “ietf-inet-types” YANG module, e.g.,
> > protocol-number, ip-address-link-local, ip-address-and-prefix…
> > Should this be fixed?
> 
> Yes, this should be fixed. When the initial version was produced,
> there was quite some concern about consistency with SMIv2 definitions
> and this lead to the tables. Meanwhile, I assume the purpose of the
> tables is more to provide a quick overview. Hence I propose to split
> the tables into (i) tables that provide an overview of all types
> defined in the YANG modules and (ii) tables that detail equivalent
> SMIv2 types where they exist (short tables). For the overview tables,
> I suggest to add some more information. I am thinking of overview
> tables like these (keep scrolling, there is more text below):
> 
> * ietf-yang-types
> 
>   | Typedef               | Type              | Introduced |
>   |-----------------------+-------------------+------------|
>   | counter32             | uint32            | RFC 6021   |
>   | zero-based-counter32  | uint32            | RFC 6021   |
>   | counter64             | uint64            | RFC 6021   |
>   | zero-based-counter64  | uint64            | RFC 6021   |
>   | gauge32               | uint32            | RFC 6021   |
>   | gauge64               | uint64            | RFC 6021   |
>   |-----------------------+-------------------+------------|
>   | object-identifier     | string            | RFC 6021   |
>   | object-identifier-128 | object-identifier | RFC 6021   |
>   |-----------------------+-------------------+------------|
>   | date-and-time         | string            | RFC 6021   |
>   | date                  | string            | RFC XXXX   |
>   | time                  | string            | RFC XXXX   |
>   |-----------------------+-------------------+------------|
>   | hours32               | int32             | RFC XXX    |
>   | minutes32             | int32             | RFC XXX    |
>   | seconds32             | int32             | RFC XXX    |
>   | centiseconds32        | int32             | RFC XXX    |
>   | milliseconds32        | int32             | RFC XXX    |
>   | microseconds32        | int32             | RFC XXX    |
>   | microseconds64        | int64             | RFC XXX    |
>   | nanoseconds32         | int32             | RFC XXX    |
>   | nanoseconds64         | int64             | RFC XXX    |
>   | timeticks             | int32             | RFC 6020   |
>   | timestamp             | timeticks         | RFC 6020   |
>   |-----------------------+-------------------+------------|
>   | phys-address          | string            | RFC 6020   |
>   | mac-address           | string            | RFC 6020   |
>   |-----------------------+-------------------+------------|
>   | xpath1.0              | string            | RFC 6020   |
>   | hex-string            | string            | RFC 6991   |
>   | uuid                  | string            | RFC 6991   |
>   | dotted-quad           | string            | RFC 6991   |
>   | yang-identifier       | string            | RFC 6991   |
>   | revision-identifier   | date              | RFC XXXX   |
>   |-----------------------+-------------------+------------|
>   | percent-i32           | int32             | RFC XXXX   |
>   | percent-u32           | uint32            | RFC XXXX   |
>   | percent               | uint8             | RFC XXXX   |
>   |-----------------------+-------------------+------------|
> 
> * ietf-inet-types
> 
>   | Typedef                 | Type         | Introduced |
>   |-------------------------+--------------+------------|
>   | ip-version              | enum         | RFC 6021   |
>   | dscp                    | uint8        | RFC 6021   |
>   | ipv6-flow-label         | uint32       | RFC 6021   |
>   | port-number             | uint16       | RFC 6021   |
>   | protocol-number         | uint8        | RFC XXXX   |
>   | as-number               | uint32       | RFC 6021   |
>   |-------------------------+--------------+------------|
>   | ip-address              | union        | RFC 6021   |
>   | ipv4-address            | string       | RFC 6021   |
>   | ipv6-address            | string       | RFC 6021   |
>   | ip-address-no-zone      | union        | RFC 6991   |
>   | ipv4-address-no-zone    | ipv4-address | RFC 6991   |
>   | ipv6-address-no-zone    | ipv6-address | RFC 6991   |
>   | ip-address-link-local   | union        | RFC XXXX   |
>   | ipv4-address-link-local | ipv4-address | RFC XXXX   |
>   | ipv6-address-link-local | ipv6-address | RFC XXXX   |
>   | ip-prefix               | union        | RFC 6021   |
>   | ipv4-prefix             | string       | RFC 6021   |
>   | ipv6-prefix             | string       | RFC 6021   |
>   | ip-address-and-prefix   | union        | RFC XXXX   |
>   | ipv4-address-and-prefix | string       | RFC XXXX   |
>   | ipv6-address-and-prefix | string       | RFC XXXX   |
>   |-------------------------+--------------+------------|
>   | domain-name             | string       | RFC 6021   |
>   | host-name               | domain-name  | RFC XXXX   |
>   | host                    | union        | RFC 6021   |
>   |-------------------------+--------------+------------|
>   | uri                     | string       | RFC 6021   |
>   | email-address           | string       | RFC XXXX   |
>   |-------------------------+--------------+------------|
> 
> In future versions we may add a column indicating the status, but
> right now all definitions are current, so I rather not add noise.
> (Instead of the column 'Introduced' one could have a column 'Revision'
> listing the revision date but somehow pointing to the RFC feels more
> valuable for modules that we publish in RFCs. And even better would be
> to produce such tables from annotations, perhaps the versioning people
> solve that problem.)
> 
> While putting these tables together, I noticed that we are not
> consistent with the naming. We have percent-i32 and percent-u32 and I
> think this is pretty neat since the name indicates that these are
> signed and unsigned (int32 and uint32) types. We also have hours32,
> minutes32, seconds32, etc. but here the name provides no clue whether
> the number is signed. Hence, I suggest to use the naming scheme that
> is used for the percent types:
> 
>   hours32               -> hours-i32
>   minutes32             -> minutes-i32
>   seconds32             -> seconds-i32
>   centiseconds32        -> centiseconds-i32
>   milliseconds32        -> milliseconds-i32
>   microseconds32        -> microseconds-i32
>   microseconds64        -> microseconds-i64
>   nanoseconds32         -> nanoseconds-i32
>   nanoseconds64         -> nanoseconds-i64
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Jürgen Schönwälder              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