Re: AUGMENTS clause

["Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>]

Hi -

> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
> To: "David T. Perkins" <dperkins@dsperkins.com>; "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
> Cc: <mreview@ops.ietf.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 5:17 AM
> Subject: AUGMENTS clause
>

> So, after a quick check of a few document, for example,
> atmVclGenTable in RFC3606 seems to violate the concept of AUGMENTS,
> right?
...

It's not immediately clear from RFC 3606 how this table is actually used,
but it looks like you're right.  There seems to be some kind of chicken/egg
relationship between atmSigDescrParamIndex and atmVclGenSigDescrIndex,
but it's not clear to me how atmVclGenSigDescrIndex gets its initial value when an
atmVclEntry is created.  This is a great example of where a use case or two might
make a document much clearer.

Randy