Re: [Mibble-users] Wrong constraints

[Per Cederberg]

No problem, just glad that it wasn't an issue in Mibble after all. The
standards surrounding ASN.1 and SNMP are overly complex, so there is
always plenty of room for confusion, ambiguities and bugs.

Cheers,

/Per

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Karl Weber <address@hidden> wrote:
> Am Montag, 12. Mai 2008 00:10 schrieb Karl Weber:
>
> > Hi,
>  > Hi Per,
>  >
>  > I am no ASN.1 expert, so I cannot tell whether the following is an error,
>  > but according to my understanding of the X.208 I suppose so.
>  >
>
>  My post was a little rash. SMIv2 as specified in rfc2578 uses some features,
>  that are not in accordance with Recommendation X.208.
>
>  [...]
>
>
>  > Mibble creates a VALUE-SYMBOL for every >identifier< (as it is called in
>  > section 14.1 of the X.208 Recommendation) explicitly listed in the SYNTAX
>  > of the type definition of RowStatus. Furthermore, it adds a compound
>  > constraint, restricting the value set of the RowStatus type to the values
>  > listed, thus effectively creating a subtype of INTEGER. Is this correct?
>  >
>
>  -- Yes, according to the 2nd paragraph in section 7.1.1 in rfc2578, but
>  -- no according to X.208.
>
>  Since the relevant standard here is rfc2578, the final answer is yes.
>
>  Before my next post, I will try to do a complete survey of the relevant
>  standards documents.
>
>  -Karl
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Mibble-users mailing list
>  address@hidden
>  http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mibble-users
>