Re: BER encoding of Unsigned32 and BITS

Juergen:

The intent for the SPPI is to reuse as much of SMIv2 as possible.
I believe BITS is a construct created in SMIv2 (I think in the modified 
version).
And it is described in RFC 2578 (SMIv2) section 7.1.4 on page 22.

If you feel the SPPI (RFC 3159) needs to be corrected, please advise.
Thank!
-- Kwok --

At 12:36 PM 9/8/03 +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:

> >>>>> Kwok Ho Chan writes:
>
>[...]
>
>Kwok> <KHC> The SPPI (RFC 3159) does not list all types used in PIBs,
>Kwok> it only indicate the ones different from SMI.  The ones that are
>Kwok> not defined in SPPI are assumed to be same as in SMI.  This is
>Kwok> stated in SPPI, section 2 on page 4 as: "This document specifies
>Kwok> the SPPI also via a ASN.1 definition, which is a modified
>Kwok> version of the SMI's definition, together with descriptive text
>Kwok> for only those elements in the SPPI's ASN.1 definition which
>Kwok> have differences from the SMI's.  For elements in the ASN.1
>Kwok> definition which have no descriptive text in this specification,
>Kwok> the reader is referred to the SMI's descriptive text for that
>Kwok> element."
>
>Kwok, please note that the serialization of BITS into OCTET STRING
>values is not defined in the SMI and hence your comment does not
>really help.
>
>/js
>
>--
>Juergen Schoenwaelder               International University Bremen
><http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>     P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany