Re: Time to Revise the TC list

["David T. Perkins" <dperkins@dsperkins.com>]

HI,

Bad design choices in MIB compilers if it is fixed instead of
parameterized in a config file.

Regards,
/david t. perkins

On Fri, 5 May 2006, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> > From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
> > To: "Wes Hardaker" <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
> > Cc: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>; "Mreview (E-mail)" <mreview@ops.ietf.org>; <ietfmibs@ops.ietf.org>
> > Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 1:04 AM
> > Subject: RE: Time to Revise the TC list
> ...
> > - It is (in my view) ALLWAYS possible to take a copy (renamed) of any
> >   TC and include it in a document that wants to advance and then
> >   use the renamed TC. It means no semantic change of any object and
> >   it means no change on the wire.
> ...
> 
> This is problematic for users of MIB compilers that know how to generate code
> for certain "interesting" TCs.  Examples of where this is useful include
> enforcing repertoire and encoding constraints for DisplayString.
> 
> Randy
> 
>