RE: section 3.2 of draft-ietf-ops-mib-review-guidelines-00.txt

[Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>]

At 09:49 PM 2/9/2003 +0100, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>So could I read that 2nd sentence as "if not defined
>in this module it must be imported" ?
>
>I agree with Dan ROmascanu here that if we indeed intended
>to prohibit to define OBJECT-GROUPS that have objects from
>other modules, that we have then sort of maneuvred ourselves
>a bit into a corner, no?

No.  Mike's email (9:28 am) states the exact solution.
The MODULE-COMPLIANCE in module B specifies that the
undesired objects from module A are MIN-ACCESS not-accessible.
This works even if module A defined OBJECT-GROUPs containing
external objects.


>Thanks,
>Bert 

Andy



>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: C. M. Heard [mailto:heard@pobox.com]
>> Sent: zondag 9 februari 2003 21:43
>> To: mibs@ops.ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: section 3.2 of 
>> draft-ietf-ops-mib-review-guidelines-00.txt
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>> > I did see those section 3.1 and 4.1 of 2580. 
>> > They do state that you MUST define OBJECT GROUPS in the
>> > same module and make sure that every object is present in
>> > at least one OBJECT GROUP.
>> > 
>> > But I don't think that these 2 sections preclude/prohibit
>> > that you can define additional OBJECT GROUPS in other modules,
>> > does it? Maybe the SMIv2 authors can chime in here?
>> 
>> The wording in RFC 2580 seems quite clear to me.  See the second
>> sentence of each of the paragraphs quoted below.
>> 
>> 3.1.  Mapping of the OBJECTS clause
>> 
>>    The OBJECTS clause, which must be present, is used to specify each
>>    object contained in the conformance group.  Each of the specified
>>    objects must be defined in the same information module as the
>>    OBJECT-GROUP macro appears, and must have a MAX-ACCESS clause value
>>    of "accessible-for-notify", "read-only", "read-write", or "read-
>>    create".
>> 
>> [ ... ]
>> 
>> 4.1.  Mapping of the NOTIFICATIONS clause
>> 
>>    The NOTIFICATIONS clause, which must be present, is used to specify
>>    each notification contained in the conformance group.  Each of the
>>    specified notifications must be defined in the same information
>>    module as the NOTIFICATION-GROUP macro appears.
>> 
>> I interpret the words
>> 
>>    Each of the specified ... must be defined in the same information
>>    module as [the one in which] the ... macro appears.
>> 
>> to mean that module B can't import notifications or objects from
>> module A and define a group that includes them.  To put it another
>> another way:  every group defineed in module B may contain only
>> objects or notifications defined in module B.
>> 
>> //cmh
>> 
>> P.S.  smilint apparently does not enforce this rule.  I've 
>> not yet checked
>> whether other MIB compilers do.
>> 
>>