On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 04:52:41PM +0200, Martin Björklund wrote:
> Jürgen Schönwälder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > For me, the only sensible option (other than accepting that types are
> > named the way they are) is to introduce ip-address-with-zone and to
> > deprecate ip-address and stop there. Yes, this means coexistance of
> > inet:ip-address and ip-address-with-zone until YANG is getting
> > replaced.
>
> But then what would you do with inet:host?
>
I would define ip-address-with-zone to be the same as ip-address
(i.e., with an optional zone index) and then I would then use
ip-address-with-zone instead of ip-address in inet:host (like we are
all going to replace the deprecated ip-address with either
ip-address-with-zone or ip-address-no-zone in all modules in the
future to avoid depending on a deprecated definition).
It does not make sense to me to have a type mandating a zone since on
all systems I know of the zone index shows up only when needed (and
creating yet another union seems overkill).
/js
PS: I guess someone will propose to use ip-address-opt-zone instead
ip-address-with-zone. ;-)
--
Jürgen Schönwälder 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
