RE: SIZE constraint language for InetAddress index objects indraft-ietf-ops-rfc3291bis-01.txt

["C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Eduardo Cardona wrote:
> One more question what is the straight methodology when assigning the
> SIZE constrains for drafts where no IANA number is being assigned to the
> mib module? 
> Will that be a note to the RFC editor to change the value when assigning
> the module root ID ?

Usually, the IANA assignment will result in changing something like
   ::= { mib-2 xxx }    -- to be filled in by IANA
to something like
   ::= { mib-2 58 }
(using here the PerfHist-TC-MIB as an example).

When you do a test MIB compilation, you need to TEMPORARILY replace
"xxx" with a real number (any in the range 0..2^32-1 will do).  The
number of sub-identifiers will be independent of the value used.

> One clarification. 
> Are the sub-identifiers counted as the mib definition or as ASN.1
> encoded ? I think (may be I am wrong) is as ASN.1 encoded) for example
> .1.3.6.1.4.1.230.2.4; 230 (> 127) is encoded by two sub-identifiers

No, sub-identifiers are counted as the mib definition, per
RFC 2578 section 7.7 bullets (4) and (5). The latter reads:

(5)  object identifier-valued (when not preceded by the IMPLIED
     keyword):  `n+1' sub-identifiers, where `n' is the number of sub-
     identifiers in the value (the first sub-identifier is `n' itself,
     following this, each sub-identifier in the value is copied);

Mike