IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] WGLC draft-ietf-opsawg-mib-floats

Juergen Quittek <ietf@quittek.at> Thu, 31 March 2011 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@quittek.at>
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 A952F3A6A3B for <opsawg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.248
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35]
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 J8lDYty9EOnm for <opsawg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.17.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 952B73A6844 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-536c.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-536c.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.83.108]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MFOim-1Q8cDu48c0-00ESYM; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:42:43 +0200
References: <3D50A761-7279-4564-A8EA-6CBAAD62CC84@cdl.asgaard.org> <4CD5A6BA-7C3C-42ED-9CBB-9ACDB3F7F77B@quittek.at> <20110331122844.7503ed87@ispx.vb.futz.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110331122844.7503ed87@ispx.vb.futz.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <3A9BFBDA-6231-46C5-94E7-1BEDA5186710@quittek.at>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Juergen Quittek <ietf@quittek.at>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:42:42 +0200
To: Robert Story <rstory@tislabs.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:T3EodvfDQmDJ8Cnp59xRm593jYOKvXPFRRDNtgP/pPf eWRHsjyeLhyO2qZdxKy1iHQ8pmAvpzuNvpKTIUF0xu2qFGGSPN Mz0V988/fFOtDU+uU+RkZ85FP5XtrymtkcBfUydap1RHhfcd/n EUrb7m37SWxzwwGQ4QZ/035WYRhJ4VJb6rSmL6dvPH33Ztqdaf xITQQmdygiYSA9TwI6F9Q==
Cc: draft-ietf-opsawg-mib-floats@tools.ietf.org, opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] WGLC draft-ietf-opsawg-mib-floats
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/mail-archive/web/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:41:16 -0000

So, is this a "yes"?
Do we think it is clear for implementors?

Thanks, Juergen

Am 31.03.2011 um 18:28 schrieb Robert Story:

> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:15:58 +0200 Juergen wrote:
> JQ> I have read the draft and have only one question:
> JQ> Would the byte order (endianness) in the octet arrays be obvious to an
> JQ> implementor? Or could there be incompatibilities between big-endian and
> JQ> little-endian implementations?
> 
> I asked about this back in December, and got this response:
> 
> On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:07:18 -0800 Randy wrote:
> RP>  I specifically said "interchange format"
> RP> for IEEE floats, since that *does* specify that the sign bit comes
> RP> first.  For a freely-available secondary reference, see
> RP> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_754-2008#Interchange_formats
> 
> 
> Robert
> 
> --
> Senior Software Engineer
> SPARTA (dba Cobham Analytic Soloutions)

v2.34.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status