Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix
Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Mon, 29 April 2019 09:30 UTC
Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
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 0D5FA1200E6 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 02:30:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.cz
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 msR5kPO5Ms85 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 02:30:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [217.31.204.67]) (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 3AB4912001B for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 02:30:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from birdie (unknown [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1::380]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2AEA763708 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:30:46 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1556530246; bh=6Y2schFvF//bukExcI9bADwtHpw6PVBdg1C9pPFns3E=; h=From:To:Date; b=Yp0RmCZ1HhsU+Q6Dj49lcQGB/o+tK/vFY6FMQ6DYpIJBagMm0UdcASP1MdlCJcvE+ M3u/Cf6C2crDXJa9oW1VbNtPWDqKPc4nJQe8zOxk1Qerncu2RG5PB+yvL5v1x1OWuF b6w/w+ljNWR6mbxgSGtDcQhuXH3TYbuHgo3yzdhM=
Message-ID: <77bca9a34ecc94376106d8d72f1f46b9c917d242.camel@nic.cz>
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
To: netmod@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:30:47 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20190429.104825.851380569838026345.mbj@tail-f.com>
References: <227a2452-69f9-6786-2643-822e70dc636d@spritelink.net> <20190425215134.pabdl3bbbjoivbaj@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <01894841-bbf5-ce19-1a60-4737bc717311@spritelink.net> <20190429.104825.851380569838026345.mbj@tail-f.com>
Organization: CZ.NIC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/wHnmMDg9M431OroVf8iIxEZb7oQ>
Subject: Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix
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: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 09:30:51 -0000
On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 10:48 +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Kristian Larsson <kristian@spritelink.net> wrote: > > > > On 2019-04-25 23:51, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 11:20:57PM +0200, Kristian Larsson wrote: > > > > > > > > On 2019-04-18 13:12, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:53:22PM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:43:05AM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +17.4 is not an integer, so this is an error (not because of the + > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > because of the . followed by additional digits). +17 is I think a > > > > > > > valid > > > > > > > integer value but the + will be dropped in the canonical > > > > > > > representation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, but 2001:db8::1/64 isn't valid prefix (because the host portion > > > > > > of the > > > > > > prefix isn't 0) so why should it be "rounded" when 17.4 shouldn't be > > > > > > rounded > > > > > > if an integer input is expected? > > > > > > > > > > The non-prefix bits are irrelevant for the prefix and the canonical > > > > > format has the non-prefix bits all set to zero. I understand that you > > > > > prefer 2001:db8::1/64 to be an error but RFC 6021 and RFC 6991 > > > > > consider this as valid input that can be safely interpreted to mean > > > > > 2001:db8::0/64. > > > > > > > > Vice versa, if an implementation does treat 2001:db8::1/64 as a syntax > > > > error, is that implementation incorrect? > > > > > > > I think so. The types do not require that non-prefix bits are zero > > > when a value is received. However, a server must report the canonical > > > value, in this case 2001:db8::/64. > > > > Cisco NSO treats 2001:db8::1/64 as a syntax error for a leaf of type > > ip-prefix (or ip6-prefix). > > > > It would be interesting to hear Martins opinion on this. > > I did some digging, and it turns out that we had this type internally > before it was part if ietf-inet-types, where we did not require that > all non-prefix bits were zero, but at one point (after > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-types-00 back in 2008) checked in a fix: > > The confd:ipv4Prefix and confd:ipv6Prefix types now require that all > bits that do not belong to the prefix are set to zero. This is for > compatibility with the corresponding YANG types defined by the IETF > NETMOD working group. > > You may want to see the threads: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/bXL0Mec_ZVVyalmK3pNHkczm6ZI > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/3Wz5BPgxZajCZloAOjU-ycfr9Lg > > Specifically Juergen's proposal: > > Require that all bits that are not part of the prefix are set to > zero (192.0.2.8/24 becomes an invalid representation of an IPv4 > prefix) Interestingly, the revisions of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-types preceding this thread also had this sentence for ipv4-prefix: The IPv4 address represented in dotted quad notation should have all bits that do not belong to the prefix set to zero. In the immediately following revision (draft-ietf-netmod-yang-types-02), this sentence was removed, though not for ipv6-prefix. Lada > > I can't find any discussion in the archive about allowing non-zero non-prefix > bits. So I think that the original intention was to be strict in > these types. I agree that the current description text needs > clarification in either case. > > > > /martin > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
- [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix 7riw77
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Lou Berger
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix William Lupton
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Kristian Larsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Kristian Larsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Kristian Larsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Kristian Larsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Kristian Larsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix tom petch
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix tom petch
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix Ladislav Lhotka
- [netmod] convert it and not throw an error was Re… tom petch
- Re: [netmod] convert it and not throw an error wa… Christian Hopps