Re: [IPFIX] review of draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export-07

If BITS really isn't intended to encode integers with numeric or flag semantics, then yes, it should be encoded as an octetArray.

Cheers,

Brian
 
> On 17 Dec 2014, at 16:48, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 04:05:52PM +0100, Paul Aitken wrote:
>> Thanks for this Juergen. I'll produce an updated version for the editorial issues.
>> 
>> For the BITS issue, the largest IPFIX types are currently 64 bits (ie, signed64 / unsigned64). Although we could request a 128-bit type, we're simply moving the absolute limit along without solving the underlying issue.
> 
> SNMP encodes the bits into an octet string - an octetArray in
> IPFIX. Could this be done here as well?
> 
>> Do you know what size the largest BITS object is today? Would it be
>> acceptable to limit the size that can be exported in IPFIX to the
>> first 64 or 128 bits?
> 
> The first question can't be answered so I can't answer the second. It
> would be best, though, if IPFIX would not have to introduce a limit.
> Would an octetArray not work?
> 
> /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

_______________________________________________
IPFIX mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix