Re: [OPSAWG] [nmrg] draft-irtf-nmrg-snmp-measure-04.txt oidxmlpattern change

"Natale, Bob" <RNATALE@mitre.org> Fri, 16 May 2008 14:28 UTC

Return-Path: <opsawg-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: opsawg-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-opsawg-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 401D328C1CC; Fri, 16 May 2008 07:28:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: opsawg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018D328C1CC for <opsawg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 May 2008 07:28:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.164
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.164 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.036, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_34=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Av+loku0AeF2 for <opsawg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 May 2008 07:28:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-bedford.mitre.org (smtp-bedford.mitre.org [129.83.20.191]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C54143A67A1 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 May 2008 07:28:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-bedford.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m4GES5uA022954 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 May 2008 10:28:05 -0400
Received: from IMCFE1.MITRE.ORG (imcfe1.mitre.org [129.83.29.3]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m4GES5mS022950; Fri, 16 May 2008 10:28:05 -0400
Received: from IMCSRV2.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.20.164]) by IMCFE1.MITRE.ORG with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 16 May 2008 10:28:05 -0400
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 10:27:05 -0400
Message-ID: <4915F014FDD99049A9C3A8C1B832004F02AEAA5E@IMCSRV2.MITRE.ORG>
In-Reply-To: <07ef01c8b75f$0c1b7000$0600a8c0@china.huawei.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] [nmrg] draft-irtf-nmrg-snmp-measure-04.txt oidxmlpattern change
Thread-Index: Aci3UELJ3N6FvxJ6R86avAHLVyYyMgACifDAAADWtXAAAF4OEA==
References: <20080516122704.GB19275@elstar.local><4915F014FDD99049A9C3A8C1B832004F02AEAA46@IMCSRV2.MITRE.ORG> <07ef01c8b75f$0c1b7000$0600a8c0@china.huawei.com>
From: "Natale, Bob" <RNATALE@mitre.org>
To: David Harrington <ietfdbh@comcast.net>, j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de, Bert Wijnen <bertietf@bwijnen.net>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 May 2008 14:28:05.0014 (UTC) FILETIME=[0DBB2B60:01C8B761]
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, nmrg@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [nmrg] draft-irtf-nmrg-snmp-measure-04.txt oidxmlpattern change
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/opsawg>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org

Hi David,

You are right about the fidelity basis for SNMP to ASN.1/BER, but I
don't think the version diffs come into play on this point.  The rule
for BER encoding of the first two sub-ids (X and Y) probably always has
boiled down to "(X*40)+Y" -- which was expressed as far back as
Steedman's book as "40m + n", where (p. 93) he says:

"This saves an octet from every value, exploiting the fact that 0 <= m
<= 2, and that, except possibly for m = 2 (joint-iso-ccitt), n is a
very small number."

Ahhh, the good old days! :)

There is a registered value for 2.41 (ITU-T Rec. X.1083 | ISO/IEC
24708: BioAPI Interworking Protocol (BIP)), approved in Sep-2007, which
requires Juergen's correction...and one could imagine that it could
need to be carried in an SNMP varbind.

Cheers,
BobN

-----Original Message-----
From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of David Harrington
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 10:14 AM
To: Natale, Bob; j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de; 'Bert Wijnen'
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org; nmrg@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [nmrg] draft-irtf-nmrg-snmp-measure-04.txt
oidxmlpattern change

Hi,

SMIv2 is based on ASN.1-1988 not ASN.1-2002.
XSDMI should maintain fidelity to SMIv2.
I would think the snmp-measure document should do so also.

We should be liberal in what we accept, and conservative in what we
send, of course. I think XSDMI should enforce the 1988 syntax, since
one expected use case is validation; it probably will make no
difference to the snmp-research document, whose use case is reporting.


In practice, I have never seen a 2.X in any SMIv2 MIB module.

dbh 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Natale, Bob
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 9:48 AM
> To: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de; Bert Wijnen
> Cc: opsawg@ietf.org; nmrg@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [nmrg] 
> draft-irtf-nmrg-snmp-measure-04.txt oid xmlpattern change
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Juergen is correct (per Sec. 8.19 of ITU-T Recommendation X.690,
> prepared by ITU-T Study Group 17 and approved on 14 July 2002,
> identical text is also published as ISO/IEC 8825-1).
> 
> draft-ietf-opsawg-smi-datatypes-in-xsd-02.txt (to be posted any day
> now!) will contain the fix Juergen provides below.
> 
> Cheers,
> BobN
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nmrg-bounces@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
> [mailto:nmrg-bounces@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de] On Behalf Of Juergen
> Schoenwaelder
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 8:27 AM
> To: nmrg@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de; Bert Wijnen
> Subject: [nmrg] draft-irtf-nmrg-snmp-measure-04.txt oid xml pattern
> change
> 
> Hi,
> 
> there was recently a discussion on the XSD pattern for object
> identifier values and it was pointed out that the pattern we picked
up
> from the SMI-XSD document is too restrictive by not allowing OIDs of
> the format 2.X.* where X is larger than 39. I therefore propose that
> we change the pattern used by oid.type from
> 
>       "[0-2](\.[1-3]?[0-9])(\.(0|([1-9]\d*))){0,126}"
> 
> to
> 
>       "([0-1](\.[1-3]?[0-9]))|(2.(0|([1-9]\d*)))" ~
>       "(\.(0|([1-9]\d*))){0,126}"
> 
> Any objections against this change which is really a bugfix? Bert,
do
> we run into procedural trouble if we fix this or an additional N
weeks
> delay? (In that case, I would be tempted to go along with the buggy
> version of the pattern. ;-)
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> -- 
> !! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To
unsubscribe
> or adjust
> !! your settings, send a mail message to 
> <nmrg-request@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
> !! or look at https://mail.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
> 

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg