Re: Use of BITS construct in table indices
Daniel Chuang <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.snmpv3 |
|---|---|
| Organization | Juniper |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I believe it is N = (M/8) + 1. Thanks, Daniel Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: >Actaully I think it is: > > N = (7 + M)/8 where M is highest bit value > >Thanks, >Bert > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Knotts, Jay B (Jay) [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: donderdag 14 november 2002 15:45 >>To: [email protected] >>Subject: RE: Use of BITS construct in table indices >> >> >> >>This is the correct formula for calculating string length of >>BITS? Just wanted to make sure. >> >> >>>>I am inclined to believe that it is considered a >>>> >>variable-length string, >> >>>>and subject to being encoded with (N+1) subidentifiers where >>>>N = (M + (M % 8))/8, M = highest bit value supported by an >>>> >>implementation, >> >>>>unless it is an IMPLIED index. >>>> >>Jay Knotts >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 9:06 AM >>To: [email protected] >>Cc: [email protected] >>Subject: Re: Use of BITS construct in table indices >> >> >> >>>>>>>Michael Kirkham writes: >>>>>>> >>Michael> RFC 2578 is a bit vague on the legality and implications of >>Michael> using objects of type 'BITS' as an INDEX. It's not >>Michael> explicitly forbidden, and seems to be legal given that it is >>Michael> otherwise indistinguishable from an OCTET STRING. If it's >>Michael> legal, then, for purposes of encoding the instance identifier >>Michael> for a columnar object, is it considered a fixed-length or a >>Michael> variable-length OCTET STRING (since new bits can be added >>Michael> over time)? >> >>RFC 2578 section 7.7 page 28: >> >> Since a single value of a Counter has (in general) no information >> content (see section 7.1.6 and 7.1.10), objects defined using the >> syntax, Counter32 or Counter64, must not be specified in an INDEX >> clause. If an object defined using the BITS construct is used in an >> INDEX clause, it is considered a variable-length string. >> >>I think the last sentence provides a clear answer to your question. >> >>/js >> >>-- >>Juergen Schoenwaelder >> ><http://www.informatik.uni-osnabrueck.de/schoenw/> > >