IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Teas] "Addresses" in examples in draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Tue, 25 October 2022 18:36 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59999C14CF0E; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 11:36:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.891
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VTlS2XHPdBui; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 11:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta8.iomartmail.com (mta8.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.158]) (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 0EDD6C14CE32; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 11:35:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (vs1.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.121]) by mta8.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 29PIZaRu014243; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 19:35:36 +0100
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD3844604B; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 19:35:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A414603D; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 19:35:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.249]) by vs1.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 19:35:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (231.197.bbplus.pte-ag1.dyn.plus.net [81.174.197.231] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 29PIZZr0029271 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Oct 2022 19:35:36 +0100
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Dhruv Dhody' <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang@ietf.org, teas@ietf.org
References: <10f201d8a8cd$242f47b0$6c8dd710$@olddog.co.uk> <CAB75xn4NFQpPM+o2hUE-w1ECPLtdOk=o7zGQ_f-UZ1_bVwu6Zg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB75xn4NFQpPM+o2hUE-w1ECPLtdOk=o7zGQ_f-UZ1_bVwu6Zg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 19:35:34 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <088601d8e8a0$92808fe0$b781afa0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0887_01D8E8A8.F4459420"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQEiRbp/Hsv4f0dcLckUNTRxkEV8ZAGM3+/gr4BMttA=
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 81.174.197.231
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.0.1002-27224.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--23.219-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--23.219-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.1002-27224.001
X-TMASE-Result: 10--23.219300-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: C/snMIRQLS3xIbpQ8BhdbI61Z+HJnvsO1yGzR7OHU3fgm7lSO4VWy3uL dMlaRil5KxqELAdFqqmjNOxS7MQ8Z/sx/eGmU6zkOM0alYIi99PT2VrdfuNrJmuyajlFLKLVcMr AMXP3sn0gD2ZoqdFkO0uuU5J9c2thlOHrXvxE0fQTuwt1FVoaZ99WrDP4LKdpqVVEdEr2LUr1O9 p2Fcb2DeA+pVvNiWVRG/MSNjg92e3sg8vFfJU1lGQYj6+BFPEwUaTm5EfQzMJHpEd1UrzmFdo4F ZoSpQ8Yqh9drh/jR8JUIeWBPbgx+4M8neyDXeYn7kIYxuaO6ZS4oAbg4yXJ/44fFueSeIindeqE rkVhgOkSW2ZMFgOR2Ah6TX2bzUHmU6L1rmVqlpFmNCKOCsW/OgWhMWXqiWWyDpnuR5eZKJbQ0py FljzBRx72DTGItWXM/76CM4Z/MGblRxm3A2wKuhRFJJyf5BJeWQy9YC5qGvzQBQ8SBUzMXzPSZI 4EDzxz33fj+sMArfNRzX47Vf0DMQ==
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/sx3ICFxwR6wE0Pp9eGXapSml6js>
Subject: Re: [Teas] "Addresses" in examples in draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 18:36:12 -0000

Thanks, Dhruv.

 

Adrian

--

It's Christmas. 

Treat someone you love to a fairy story.

Books of fairy tales for adults of all ages:

• Tales from the Wood

• More Tales from the Wood

• Tales from Beyond the Wood

• Tales from the Castle

Get them on line  <https://www.feedaread.com/profiles/8604/> https://www.feedaread.com/profiles/8604/

Get them from me at IETF-115 in London

Or buy a signed copy from me by post

 

 

 

From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> 
Sent: 24 October 2022 17:14
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
Cc: draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang@ietf.org; teas@ietf.org
Subject: Re: "Addresses" in examples in draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang

 

Hi Adrian, 

 

I have updated the I-D to handle this - https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang-16

 

Thanks! 

Dhruv

 

On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 6:43 PM Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk <mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk> > wrote:

Hi,

Just looking at draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang-15 and the example in 7.1

While the abstract-node-id is of type te-node-id and, per RFC 8776, might
not be an actual IP address, the convention seems largely to be to use an
address. So maybe it would be good to stick to the conventions for addresses
in documents (RFC 5737 and
https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/)

Similarly, an ltp is of type te-tp-id and, per RFC 8776, is a ling
identifier per RFC 3630 or RFC 5305. Again, this might be an interface
address or a router ID and, while a router ID might not be a routable
address, it would also be good to stick to the conventions for addresses in
documents.

Best,
Adrian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email