Re: comments on draft-ietf-sming-reqs-03.txt

[Jon Saperia <saperia@jdscons.com>]

> Hi!
> 
> >> The semicolon is of course not a requirement. But in my opinion the
> >> prerequisites for an easy and unambiguous development of parsers is a
> >> requirement, since we are faced these days with lots of buggy SMI
> >> modules due to the fact that for a long time of more than 5 years
> >> developers didn't have MIB compilers of that precision that we are all
> >> accustomed to by C and Java compilers. I don't want to repeat such a
> >> pain.
> 
> Jon> Frank, on this specific point, I think we still disagree. The
> Jon> problems with [bad] SMI modules is that they are far less the
> Jon> result of buggy compilers and much more the result of poor design
> Jon> and implementation. This is due in part to the junior level of
> Jon> people that work on them in most companies and the relatively low
> Jon> priority the work receives. A better compiler does not solve
> Jon> much.
> 
> I agree in the sense, that a single better compiler does not make all
> the error tolerant compilers vanish. That's why some companies today
> still claim `It works for us. You have to use our MIB compiler to make
> it work for you as well.' even though there is SMICng and libsmi and
> maybe other good compilers. With a new language (no matter to which
> degree it is `new'), we have the chance to define the grammar and
> semantics more precisely and formally.  I have the feeling that we
> agree on defining the grammar in ABNF, and that's one of the things
> that look really important to me.
> 
>  -frank
> 
Frank, for me it is a matter of bang for the buck. My perspective is that the 
most pressing requirement is for more expressiveness, like aggregate objects 
and better 'inheritance' properties for our tables. My view is that these 
could be accomplished much more easily than the significant changes to the 
grammar that are being proposed and for which I still do not see compelling 
arguments. Let me propose to 'go silent' again for a while and give others the 
chance to express their views. If I hold a minority view, perhaps you should 
just move on. If, as I suspect, there are others with concerns then there 
might be room for additional conversations. I do believe that there is not 
consensus yet on what the right set of problems to solve is so it is premature 
to design a solution.:-)

Thanks,
/jon
--

Jon Saperia		     saperia@jdscons.com
			     Phone: 617-744-1079
			     Fax:   617-249-0874
			     http://www.jdscons.com/