Hello Mahesh,
On 2019-04-01 21:40, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
On Apr 1, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote:
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.
Agree. The combination makes sense for CLI, but for modeling the address and
prefix should be separate.
Okay, then why do we have an ip-prefix data type at all? With the same
line of argument you apply, it should be split up.
So you're the third person bringing up CLI. I don't get this at all. I
don't see how CLI are different from everything else. This is about data
modeling and data modeling is about expressing the world in a data
modeling language. It's like painting a picture but instead of a brush
you have a schema language like YANG. What do you see? Express it. It
doesn't matter if the purpose is a CLI, a web page or just exposing it
via NETCONF for another system to consume.
I think address-and-prefix-length is natural. JUNOS uses this format. XR
uses this format (for IPv6 at least). Nokia SROS uses this format.
We have written a bunch of models where the lack of this IMHO makes them
less elegant. I'd like for there to be an IETF standard data type to
make those models more elegant.
Kind regards,
Kristian.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
