Compliance Statements

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

> > - page 25 2nd bullet
> >   I actually wonder if it would not be better if people did
> >   list all the enumerations at the first revision of a MIB
> >   and the compliance statements. That way... it is clear 
> >   from the beginning what it is that one can expect.
> > 
> >   Of course some enumerations do not need that, because they
> >   are [not] intended to be extended, and that is OK.
> 
> I think RFC 2580 already says that.  Do we need to repeat it
> here?  The document is already pretty long, and it's not getting
> any shorter.
> 
I may not have been clear. What I meant to say is:
Suppose you have in the first version of a MIB MOdule

   someObject OBJECT-TYPE
       SYNTAX      INTEGER {
                      enum1(1),
                      enum2(2)
                      }
       MAX-ACCESS  read-create
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION "Some descr"

Then I would think if any COMPLIANCE statement in that MIB Module
could have (from the start):
  
    OBJECT someObject
    SYNTAX INTEGER   {
                      enum1(1),
                      enum2(2)
                     }

So that it is automatically covered if anyone at any time later
adds something to the enumerations. 

Of course there some enumerations where you do NOT want to do this,
but for many it might make sense. It would make sure that we do
not have to add in such additions to an existing COMPLIANCE
statement later, when an ENUM list gets extended.

Bert