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

Re: InetAddress

To: heard@pobox.com
Subject: Re: InetAddress
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 10:25:20 +0100
Cc: mreview@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10302281403140.21418-100000@shell4.bayarea.net>(heard@pobox.com)
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10302281403140.21418-100000@shell4.bayarea.net>

>>>>> C M Heard writes:

Mike> If memory serves correctly, RFC 2851 required than an
Mike> InetAddressType object be "registered before" the InetAddress
Mike> with which it was associated in order to facilitate just the
Mike> sort of thing you are trying to do.  Consensus was that this
Mike> restriction was too severe. 

Yes, the capability to algorithmically determine the InetAddressType
object was dropped in the revision process.

/js

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

References:
- Re: InetAddress
  - From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>

Prev by Date: FW: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authorsto BCP
Next by Date: RE: SNMP/MIB advisor for IDR WG
Previous by thread: Re: InetAddress
Next by thread: Possible Addition to MIB Doctors description page
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread