[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> > From: "Harrington, David" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > To: <email@example.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 10:27 AM
> > Subject: BITS
> > RFC2578 says that the BITS construct is a collection of values
> > starting at 0. RFC2578 section 9 says that BITS named-values can
> > be removed. So, I can remove bit 1's named-value legally. Can
> > the named-value at position 0 be removed legally?
> I'd say "yes".
I agree. Note that section 9 refers to removing bit positions in
syntax refinements. It is certainly legal to remove bit position
zero in a syntax refinement that is part of a compliance statement
or a capabilities statement. It is less clear whether it's legal to
do this in an object definition by refinining a TC with a base type
of BITS because that seems to contradict RFC 2578 Section 7.1.4, but
I would be inclined to allow it in a MIB review, since it could
be useful does not do any obvious harm.
- Re: BITS
- From: "David T. Perkins" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Re: BITS
- From: "Randy Presuhn" <email@example.com>