Re: WG Last Call draft-ietf-sming-reqs-04.txt

[Olivier Dubuisson <Olivier.Dubuisson@francetelecom.com>]

"David T. Perkins" wrote:
> 
> Oliver -

Oliv*i*er!

> While I and others appreciate that the ITU-T has made documents available,
> and that books on ASN.1 have been written and made available, I certainly
> would not recommend further use of ASN.1 for the language to define
> MIB/SPPI modules. From my experience, it is not the appropriate choice.

Could you please explain why you think it would not be appropriate?

And on the opposite, Jon Saperia wrote:
> 
> Of course the question becomes, the cost of the change. In my view it is not
> worth it. This is not because I think ASN.1 is the best. Just that I believe
> we can make it do what we need without causing a major discontinuity in the
> management space as we move from one to another. It is just not worth it.

Jon, can you please give your rationale?
-- 
Olivier DUBUISSON
france telecom R&D
     _                 DTL/MSV - 22307 Lannion Cedex - France
    ( )           tel: +33 2 96 05 38 50 - fax: +33 2 96 05 39 45
    / \/               --------------------------------------
    \_/\               Site ASN.1 : http://asn1.elibel.tm.fr/