[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issue with MIB compilation requirement in "AD Review of I-Ds" (http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html)

To: abierman@cisco.com
Subject: Re: Issue with MIB compilation requirement in "AD Review of I-Ds" (http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html)
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:05:56 +0100
Cc: bwijnen@lucent.com, heard@pobox.com, mreview@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <4.3.2.7.2.20021217225549.0221a7e0@fedex.cisco.com> (message fromAndy Bierman on Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:14:48 -0800)
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021217225549.0221a7e0@fedex.cisco.com>

>>>>> Andy Bierman writes:

Andy> SNMP toolkits that I am familiar with generate code stubs based
Andy> on the fooEntry descriptor and maybe the fooObject descriptor,
Andy> but never a descriptor for a TC.

It all boils down to the implementation environment one is using. I
added this check when I implemented the JIDM translation (Open Group
Technical Standard C802) where this plays a role. Formally, you are
right that this is not an SMIv2 rule. But for some users of MIBs, it
does make a difference.

I agree howver that calling objects *IndexIndex is probably a poor way
to address this warning.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder    <http://www.informatik.uni-osnabrueck.de/schoenw/>

References:
- RE: Issue with MIB compilation requirement in "AD Review of I-Ds" (http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html)
  - From: Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Issue with MIB compilation requirement in "AD Review of I-Ds" (http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html)
Next by Date: question on PIB and Counter32/Counter64
Previous by thread: RE: Issue with MIB compilation requirement in "AD Review of I-Ds" (http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html)
Next by thread: some IETF SMIv2 MIB metrics
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread