Re: inet address mib issue

[Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>]

I agree; here's the response that I got when I raised this before.

 Bill

----- Begin forwarded message:

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Subject: Re: draft-ops-endpoint-mib-04.txt
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 11:45:53 +0100
To: fenner@research.att.com
Cc: daniele@zk3.dec.com, mibs@ops.ietf.org


>>>>> Bill Fenner writes:

Bill> A related question: if there are multiple addresses in a given
Bill> table row, where all of these addresses must be the same type
Bill> because of the way the thing being managed works, do you have to
Bill> have an InetAddressType for each?

I would say yes. And I would even strongly suggest that the
InetAddressType and the InetAddress columns sit next to each other in
the order (InetAddressType, InetAddress). This rule will ensure that
generic managers will be able to understand the relationship between
these objects (which we unfortunately can't represent formally in the
SMIv2).

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder      Technical University Braunschweig
<schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>  Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks
Phone: +49 531 391 3289    Bueltenweg 74/75, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany
Fax:   +49 531 391 5936    <URL:http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/~schoenw/>




----- End forwarded message