[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: section 3.2 of draft-ietf-ops-mib-review-guidelines-00.txt
At 09:49 PM 2/9/2003 +0100, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>So could I read that 2nd sentence as "if not defined
>in this module it must be imported" ?
>I agree with Dan ROmascanu here that if we indeed intended
>to prohibit to define OBJECT-GROUPS that have objects from
>other modules, that we have then sort of maneuvred ourselves
>a bit into a corner, no?
No. Mike's email (9:28 am) states the exact solution.
The MODULE-COMPLIANCE in module B specifies that the
undesired objects from module A are MIN-ACCESS not-accessible.
This works even if module A defined OBJECT-GROUPs containing
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: C. M. Heard [mailto:email@example.com]
>> Sent: zondag 9 februari 2003 21:43
>> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>> Subject: RE: section 3.2 of
>> On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>> > I did see those section 3.1 and 4.1 of 2580.
>> > They do state that you MUST define OBJECT GROUPS in the
>> > same module and make sure that every object is present in
>> > at least one OBJECT GROUP.
>> > But I don't think that these 2 sections preclude/prohibit
>> > that you can define additional OBJECT GROUPS in other modules,
>> > does it? Maybe the SMIv2 authors can chime in here?
>> The wording in RFC 2580 seems quite clear to me. See the second
>> sentence of each of the paragraphs quoted below.
>> 3.1. Mapping of the OBJECTS clause
>> The OBJECTS clause, which must be present, is used to specify each
>> object contained in the conformance group. Each of the specified
>> objects must be defined in the same information module as the
>> OBJECT-GROUP macro appears, and must have a MAX-ACCESS clause value
>> of "accessible-for-notify", "read-only", "read-write", or "read-
>> [ ... ]
>> 4.1. Mapping of the NOTIFICATIONS clause
>> The NOTIFICATIONS clause, which must be present, is used to specify
>> each notification contained in the conformance group. Each of the
>> specified notifications must be defined in the same information
>> module as the NOTIFICATION-GROUP macro appears.
>> I interpret the words
>> Each of the specified ... must be defined in the same information
>> module as [the one in which] the ... macro appears.
>> to mean that module B can't import notifications or objects from
>> module A and define a group that includes them. To put it another
>> another way: every group defineed in module B may contain only
>> objects or notifications defined in module B.
>> P.S. smilint apparently does not enforce this rule. I've
>> not yet checked
>> whether other MIB compilers do.