Re: MIB module numbering for TBD MIB roots

[Harrie Hazewinkel <harrie@covalent.net>]

Hi,

In the past (as example DIFFSERV-MIB)  the
"::= { mib-2 xxx }" method has been adopted
various times in internet-drafts.

I believe also Bert (AD) supported this.

Harrie

--On Thursday, January 17, 2002 7:26 PM +0100 Juergen Schoenwaelder 
<schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> wrote:

>
>>>>>> Andy Bierman writes:
>
> Andy> I like plan (d):
>
> Andy> Create an OID rooting convention for Standard and Enterprise
> Andy> MIBs, requiring MIBs-in-progress to be rooted under a branch
> Andy> called 'unassigned'.
>
> Andy> For MIBs in Internet Drafts (mandatory):
>
> Andy>    unassigned ::= { mib-2 0 } fooMib ::= { unassigned x } ( == {
> Andy> mib-2 0 x } to keep IMPORTS stable)
>
> Andy> For vendor MIBs (suggested):
>
> Andy>    <prefix>Unassigned ::= { <enterprise-id> 0 } fooMib ::= {
> Andy> <prefix>Unassigned 0 x }
>
> Andy> e.g.  ciscoUnassigned ::= { enterprises 9 0 } cFooMib ::= {
> Andy> ciscoUnassigned x }
>
> Andy> where 'x' is a temporary assignment, which may be reused over
> Andy> time
>
> Requires even more edits to get rid of the unassigned definitions.
>
> I still think { mib-2 0 } or { mib-2 xxx } are good enough - it is
> virtually impossible to prevent someone from doing the wrong thing.
> I do not think (d) is in any way stronger than (a) or (b) - perhaps I
> mis-understand the meaning of 'x'.
>
> /js
>
>
>



Harrie Hazewinkel
SNMP Engineer    Covalent Technologies, Inc.
645 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA - 94105
tel: +1-415-536-95221   fax: +1-415-536-5210