RE: draft-ietf-syslog-device-mib-00.txt - Enums starting at zero

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

> On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Joan Cucchiara wrote:
> > My question is about what the current practice is
> > for starting enums at zero when there is a reason 
> > for starting at zero.
> 
> Values of enums in SMIv2 are not restricted like they
> were in SMIv1 -- they can have any integer value.
> There is no longer any reason to require them to 
> start at 1.
> 

Actually, RFC2578 sect 7.1.1 2nd para still recommends
that you start with 1. But some consider it a CLR
(Crappy Little Rule) and if you have good reasons 
(like below) then the RFC indeed does allow to start at 1.

> > Specifically in this MIB, there is an enum:
> > 
> > SyslogSeverity  ::=  TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
> >     STATUS  current
> >     DESCRIPTION
> >         "This textual convention maps out to the severity levels
> >          of syslog messages.  The syslog protocol uses the values
> >          0 (emergency), to 7 (debug)."
> >     SYNTAX  INTEGER {
> >                       emergency(1),
> >                       alert(2),
> >                       critical(3),
> >                       error(4),
> >                       warning(5),
> >                       notice(6),
> >                       info(7),
> >                       debug(8)
> >                     }
> 
> Re-numbering the enums from 0 to 7 to match RFC 3164 would make
> more sense than what is done above.
> 
> > At one point having enums start at zero in SMIv2 was 
> > not encouraged due to backwards compatibility with SMIv1,
> > but am wondering if this is still the case? 
> 
> No, not any more.  We keep SMIv1 around because we don't
> want to have to re-write perfectly good SMIv1 MIBs, but
> essentially all new work these days is done in SMIv2,
> both within and outside the IETF.
> 
> //cmh
> 
>