Re: Should a TC be allowed to remove the MAX-ACCESS restrictions of its base type?

[rpresuhn-lists@dorothy.bmc.com]

Hi -

> Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020827072736.0361aae0@127.0.0.1>
> Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:30:59 -0700
> To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>, heard@pobox.com
> From: "David T. Perkins" <dperkins@dsperkins.com>
> Subject: Re: Should a TC be allowed to remove the MAX-ACCESS
>   restrictions of its base type?
> Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org
> In-Reply-To: <200208270915.g7R9FRA19183@haerke.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
> References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10208261441080.4219-100000@shell4.bayarea.net>
>  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10208261441080.4219-100000@shell4.bayarea.net>
..
> I believe that we should write a small document creating new base
> types to be added to SMIv2. This would result in SMIv2.1 (not
> SMIv3). Then the leading MIB compilers can be updated, followed
> by the others.
..

However, if these new base types get tags other than those
of the existing base types, then we'd have a problem with
both RFC 1905 and RFC 2741, because the the wire protocols
would be different.

 ------------------------------------------------------
 Randy Presuhn          BMC Software, Inc.  SJC-1.3141
 randy_presuhn@bmc.com  2141 North First Street
 Tel: +1 408 546-1006   San José, California 95131  USA
 ------------------------------------------------------
 My opinions and BMC's are independent variables.
 ------------------------------------------------------