[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: DS MIB - please review this list...
- To: fred@cisco.com
- Subject: Re: DS MIB - please review this list...
- From: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 17:04:21 -0800
- Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org
- Delivery-date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 17:07:16 -0800
- Envelope-to: mibs-data@psg.com
- Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a
>And by the way, if you *are* going to have the MUST, there has got to be a
>simpler way to say it than ...
>
>...
>
>I read your paragraph above several times before deciding that what it
>meant is what I set forth in my proposed text.
I agree it's hard to read; particularly so because you came up with
the opposite of its intent. The order is meant to be InetAddressType,
InetAddress and then InetAddressPrefixLength:
...the object identifiers for the InetAddressType
object and the InetAddressPrefixLength object MUST
have the same length and the last sub-identifier of
the InetAddressType object [...
...] MUST be 2 less than the last sub-identifier
of the InetAddressPrefixLength object if an InetAddress
object is defined between InetAddressType and
InetAddressPrefixLength objects.
Bill