RE: Compressing Large Indices?

["Baugher, Mark" <mbaugher@passedge.com>]

I meant "we" as in Tim and me.  Tim and I had an email
"exchange" last summer about indexing tables using 
integers versus semantically meaningful values, which 
tend to result in long OIDs that must be parsed by
management agents.

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Harrington [mailto:dbh@cabletron.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2000 12:37 PM
> To: Baugher, Mark
> Cc: 'Tim Jenkins'; mibs@psg.com
> Subject: Re: Compressing Large Indices?
> 
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> I just want to understand your comment correctly. 
> 
> When you say "we" to whom are you referring?
> When you say "this exchange" are you referring to an exchange 
> explicitly
> related to this MIB module, or to the issue of integer versus
> human-readable indexes?
> 
> Thanks,
> Just trying to limit misunderstandings,
> dbh
> 
> "Baugher, Mark" wrote:
> > 
> > > >
> > > > Why not define the MIB to use integer indices?
> > >
> > > We want the ability for the user to look up information based
> > > on things that
> > > are meaningful to them: the IDs of the endpoints used in IKE
> > > negotiation.
> > >
> > The user will interact with an management application program
> > rather than directly with the MIB, right?  Seems we have had
> > this exchange before.
> > 
> > Mark
>