Re: [yang-doctors] [I2nsf] Need YANG Doctor reviewing the YANG module of draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection which I2NSF is about to call WGLC

[Paul Wouters <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2019, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:

> Mahesh Jethanandani <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>> For the record, I prefer Lada’s solution of having a union that takes
>> both a number and an identity/enum.
>
> To be concrete, it means, for example (without descriptions and references)
>
>    typedef ike-integrity-algorithm-t {
>        type union {
>            type uint16;
>            type enumeration {
>                enum NONE {
>                    value 0;
>                }
>                enum AUTH_HMAC_MD5_96 {
>                    value 1;
>                }
>                ...
>            }
>        }
>    }
>
> The unassigned and private use values won't be present as enums but can
> be used via the numeric value. 
>
> This IMO provides the benefits of both approaches and, moreover, the
> enum values are documented in place.

But that is a bug, not a feature. The location of the enum values are in
the IANA registries which continiously are updated. Putting snapshots of
those in RFCs is a bad idea.

Paul