Hi,

The request was for a combined type that contains both an ip address
*and* a prefix length in one value.  Hence the name
"ip-address-and-prefix-length" :)

I know that this type is convenient, esp. if you use it for manual
input, but I wonder if it really is good practice to squeeze two
values into one.


/martin


"Acee Lindem (acee)" <a...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Ok, now I'm confused. I see that the ietf-inet-type model already has the 
> types ipv4-prefix and ipv6-prefix. How are these any different??? 
> Thanks,
> Acee
> 
> On 4/1/19, 12:31 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <a...@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
>     I believe the "address-" could be omitted from the type identifiers. At 
> least within the routing area, "ipv4-prefix" is unambiguous. 
>     Thanks,
>     Acee
>     
>     On 4/1/19, 12:14 PM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder" 
> <netmod-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> 
> wrote:
>     
>         This is the right time for this and I would call these
>         ip-address-prefix, ipv4-address-prefix and ipv6-address
>         prefix.
>         
>         /js
>         
>         On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 04:38:34PM +0200, Kristian Larsson wrote:
>         > Hello,
>         > 
>         > seeing that 6991 is up for a refresh I wonder if this would be the 
> time to
>         > suggest the addition of a type for address-and-prefix-length, for 
> example
>         > like 192.0.2.1/24?
>         > 
>         > I find that it's the most natural way express the address and 
> prefix-length
>         > to configure on an interface or for some other use. We currently 
> have an
>         > ip-prefix type which allows CIDR style prefixes but since all bits 
> to the
>         > right of the mask is to be 0 it is only possible to use for 
> describing the
>         > IP prefix / network address itself - not the address of a host in 
> that
>         > network.
>         > 
>         > I actually wish the interface-ip modules would have used a combined 
> leaf for
>         > these settings rather than the dual-leaf approach it currently has, 
> but I
>         > suppose that ship has sailed :/
>         > 
>         > Regardless, can we add such a type? Is this the document and time 
> to do it?
>         > :)
>         > 
>         > Kind regard,
>         >    Kristian.
>         > 
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > netmod mailing list
>         > netmod@ietf.org
>         > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>         
>         -- 
>         Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
>         Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
>         Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>         
>         _______________________________________________
>         netmod mailing list
>         netmod@ietf.org
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>         
>     
>     
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to