I prefer choice since a choice says clearly upfront that what follows
are N alternatives. With when statements, I have to keep all the when
statements in my mind to derive the conclusion that the model defines
alternatives. And the transport leaf in your when construction is
redundant.
/js
On Tue
Hi, Folks:
Choice case seems interchangeable with Container+when, here is the example of
Choice case
container system {
description
"Contains various system parameters.";
choice services {
description
"Configure externally available services.";
Sorry about that Lada, I thought I was forgetting someone!
K.
> On Apr 1, 2019, at 3:37 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> Hi Kent,
>
> for the record, I was there, too.
>
> Lada
>
> Kent Watsen píše v Pá 29. 03. 2019 v 22:27 +:
>>
>> Attendees:
>>
>> - Martin Bjorklund
>> - Mahesh Jet
Issue reopened and added to the "Further Discuss" column.
K.
> On Mar 31, 2019, at 6:32 AM, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote:
>
> I also agree that we should reopen this issue to further discuss any language
> implications, and add it to the “Further Discuss” bucket.
>
> I suggest that we just d
What Kristian has proposed makes sense, in favor.
Cheers,
Jeff
On Apr 1, 2019, 1:09 PM -0700, Kristian Larsson ,
wrote:
> Hello Mahesh,
>
> On 2019-04-01 21:40, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
> >
> > > On Apr 1, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > >
> > > I know that this type is convenie
> On Apr 1, 2019, at 1:29 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>
> 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 manu
On 2019-04-01 22:51, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
On Apr 1, 2019, at 12:37 PM, Kristian Larsson wrote:
On 2019-04-01 19:29, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
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-
> On Apr 1, 2019, at 12:37 PM, Kristian Larsson wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 2019-04-01 19:29, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>> 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" :)
>
> Right yo
Hi Kristian,
Ok - I see that even though the existing ipv4-prefi type requires all 4 octets
of the address, the description indicates that the host portion must be zero in
the canonical format. Now that I understand your requirement, I'm in favor of
adding a type that removes this restriction (i
Hello Mahesh,
On 2019-04-01 21:40, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
On Apr 1, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Martin Bjorklund 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 mak
> On Apr 1, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Martin Bjorklund 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
pref
On 2019-04-01 19:38, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
On 4/1/19, 1:30 PM, "Martin Bjorklund" wrote:
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" :)
Ok - I unde
On 2019-04-01 19:29, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
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" :)
Right you are, though I'm open to other names but let's first agree on
use case / need
Yes, correct, my misremembering (I'm working also with JSONSchema which doesn't
have that).
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 2:04 PM
> To: Michael Rehder
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-wit
Hi,
Michael Rehder wrote:
[...]
> Note also that the ietf pattern regexp are not anchored so
> " junk192.168.1.1"
> and
> "192.168.1.1 "
> Are accepted.
No, this is not correct. YANG uses the XSD "dialect" of regular
expressions. In this dialect, all patterns are implicitly anchored.
Some systems require a "canonical" prefix, in that there cannot be bits past
the mask length.
Like
192.168.1.1/24
is not legal due to the ".1" for the last octet, which should be ".0".
The ietf-inet-types definition says this but does not enforce it.
Such enforcement exceeds regexp capability (
On 4/1/19, 1:30 PM, "Martin Bjorklund" wrote:
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" :)
Ok - I understand now.
I know that this type is convenient
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
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)" wrote:
I believe the "address-" could be omitted from the type identifiers. At
least within t
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"
wrote:
This is the right time for this and I would call these
ip-address
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 addit
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
I support the draft. Balazs
On 2019. 03. 25. 21:30, Kent Watsen
wrote:
This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6991-bis-00
I agree that the requirements for SDO models are slightly different from
vendors models. Really, I think that the SDO requirements are a subset of the
vendor model requirements.
I think that a single solution should be possible here.
Thanks,
Rob
From: Mahesh Jethanandani
Sent: 29 March 2019
Hi Kent,
for the record, I was there, too.
Lada
Kent Watsen píše v Pá 29. 03. 2019 v 22:27 +:
>
> Attendees:
>
> - Martin Bjorklund
> - Mahesh Jethanandani
> - Balazs Lengyel
> - Reshad Rahman
> - Xufeng Lu
> - Juergen Schoenwaelder
> - Kent Watsen
> - Robert Wilton
> - Q
25 matches
Mail list logo
