format request: support for strings which can be recognized as valid IPv4 or IPv6 addresses with a CIDR mask or netmask about openapi-specification HOT 4 OPEN

@Speeddymon this would be done by adding new formats - we can't change existing formats (some of which are specified by JSON Schema and not OpenAPI) as that will break existing users who would consider accepitng a CIDR or netmask for format: ipv4 to be an error. So we'd add more formats. This can be done by opening a PR on the format registry, which lives on the gh-pages branch in this repository.

Typically we'd add a format for each thing, and then you would use anyOf or oneOf to say that something could be either an address or a netmask, etc.

from openapi-specification.

Upon re-reading with that context, this makes sense. I'll submit a PR for consideration, thank you!

from openapi-specification.

Thanks @handrews.

I have taken a look at the gh-pages branch in registries/_format/ipv4.md and followed the link to the JSONSchema definition:

An IPv4 address according to the "dotted-quad" ABNF syntax as defined in RFC 2673, section 3.2 [RFC2673].

Following the link to RFC2673 section 3.2 (direct link to the relevant section here) states:

A Bit-String Label is represented in text -- in a zone file, for
example -- as a surrounded by the delimiters "[" and "]".
The is either a dotted quad or a base indicator and a
sequence of digits appropriate to that base, optionally followed by a
slash and a length. The base indicators are "b", "o" and "x",
denoting base 2, 8 and 16 respectively. The length counts the
significant bits and MUST be between 1 and 32, inclusive, after a
dotted quad, or between 1 and 256, inclusive, after one of the other
forms. If the length is omitted, the implicit length is 32 for a
dotted quad or 1, 3 or 4 times the number of binary, octal or
hexadecimal digits supplied, respectively, for the other forms.

So, is jsonschema wrong in not supporting the optional slash and length indicator? Should I open an issue upstream before considering to submit a new format here?

from openapi-specification.

@Speeddymon the key part of the text there is according to the "dotted-quad" ABNF syntax

What that means is that only this part of the ABNF (the "dotted-quad" production and its dependency, "decbyte") is relevant.

     dotted-quad      =  decbyte "." decbyte "." decbyte "." decbyte

     decbyte          =  1*3DIGIT

So no, jsonschema is not wrong.

If you want a format that corresponds to the "bit-string-label" production, that would be a separate format from the existing IP v4 format.

from openapi-specification.