Re: [IPFIX] Initial review of draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export-03

On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 04:47:05AM +0100, Brian Trammell wrote:
> 
> (3) Clarifying and SNMP-naif question on 11.2.2 mibObjectIdentifier: it
> seems from the examples that the intention is that the OID will be
> encoded in the document as a Unicode string of digits and "."
> characters? Is this the way OIDs are encoded in SNMP? The encoding of
> fundamentally binary data in strings is not very IPFIXish (7013 section
> 4.2 para 6), and I kind of expected these to be encoded as octetarrays
> of unsigned integers of a specified size, or something similar. However,
> if encoding-as-string is how things are done on the wire in SNMP, it's
> the right thing to do here too (7013 section 4.5). The same comment
> applies to 11.2.4.
> 

SNMP uses ASN.1/BER and this gives you are much more compact encoding
of OIDs (but this is of course a much less human/programmer friendly
representation).

> IpAddress -> ipv4Address (side question: how do you do V6 with SNMP?)

The IPv6 address types are an OCTET STRING on the wire (not a tagged
type anymore).

> (7) In 11.2.10 mibContextIdentifier: is a context identifier similar to
> an object identifier? Then it should be defined similar to 11.2.2 -- it
> doesn't need a new ADT.

No, an SNMP context is actually a more complex thing, namely a tuple
of an snmpContextEngineID and an snmpContextName.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
_______________________________________________
IPFIX mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix