Re: RE: Compilation compatibiltiy withdraft-ietf-hubmib-rfc3636bis-05

Hi,

Just to be clear, I raised the issue, not because I did a visual review
of the MIB module, but because I dropped the ID in an implementation
and it failed to compile because code that was written used the old
labels. If I failed, then could others that implemented RFC 2668 fail
as well?

C.M. Heard, what is your opinion with respect to RFC 4181
Section 4.9
top of page 29, second paragraph that had a discussion on changing
labels for named bits and the effect on compilation compatibility?

I realize the intention in the ID is to change an error back in RFC
2668. I don't think that is acceptable when compilation compatibility
is broken.

Regards,

Clay

On 9/5/2006 2:46 PM, Randy Presuhn wrote:

Hi -

From: "Edward Beili" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: "C. M. Heard" <[email protected]> ; "IETF Hub MIB Working Group" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 11:08 AM
Subject: [Hubmib] RE: Compilation compatibiltiy withdraft-ietf-hubmib-rfc3636bis-05

Clay,
>From the RFC 4181 perspective this change is allowed and was approved by the working group.
I would invite other people on this list to provide their views on that matter.

Except for the "typo" loophole, RFC 4181 doesn't seem terribly supportive:

| - Bullet (1) allows the labels of named numbers and named bits in
| SYNTAX clauses of type enumerated INTEGER or BITS to be changed.
| This can break compilation compatibility, since those labels may be
| used by DEFVAL clauses in modules that import the definitions of
| the affected objects. Therefore, labels of named numbers and named
| bits MUST NOT be changed when revising IETF MIB modules (except to
| correct typographical errors), and they SHOULD NOT be changed when
| revising enterprise MIB modules.

My (supporting) opinion is stated in the email exchange below.

A side-effect of using a common TC can be to fix a "typo"?... I guess it depends
on how good one's imagination is. Without descending into CLR-dom, I think
what's most important here is to consider whether there are any references
*anywhere* to the "mis-spelled" labels. If there are, then that supports the
perspective that the change should not be made. If there aren't, then the
change is OK even though technically forbidden, in my opinion.

Randy

_______________________________________________
Hubmib mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib

_______________________________________________
Hubmib mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib