RE: Methods in the NIM requirements

["Weiss, Walter" <WWeiss@lucentctc.com>]

Harald,

In your thinking, there are some cases where attributes are best interface
and other cases where methods are the best interface. Are these mutually
exclusive, or overlapping?

regards,

-Walter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:Harald@Alvestrand.no]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 2:58 AM
> To: Weiss, Walter; nim@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Methods in the NIM requirements
> 
> 
> At 02:16 19.04.2000 -0400, Weiss, Walter wrote:
> >If I understand you correctly each interface should be 
> represented in a
> >method. Therefore, each interface should be represented as a 
> methods. In
> >addition, each interface should also have a set of 
> attributes that provide
> >an alternate interface. Is that what you are saying?
> I don't understand the grammar above - "interface in a method"?
> 
> but generally, whatever works for the model in question.
> in some cases, methods only work best, IMHO.
> in some other cases, methods + attributes work best, IMHO.
> I still haven't seen a case which I wanted to model with 
> attributes only.
> 
> When USING the model, one can think of implementing the methods as 
> attributes that have side effects (such as SNMP "magic" 
> variables), or 
> implementing the attributes as accessor methods (which in 
> many programming 
> languages (not SNMP) give you much more power of access 
> control, syntax and 
> consistency checking).
> 
> But the tool used for modelling shouldn't enforce an implementation.
> 
>                        Harald
> 
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no
>