> On Mar 27, 2017, at 3:03 PM, Vincent Bernat <ber...@luffy.cx> wrote: > > ❦ 27 mars 2017 19:26 GMT, Jeff Haas <jh...@juniper.net> : > >> To your relevant next point: If the junos mib is in error, what to do about >> it? >> >> Very likely fixing the issue will cause mass amounts of unhappiness as >> people's existing scripts and mib walking code fails due to the new >> sub-indices. >> >> do the right thing, create misery? Leave it as is, document that it's >> wrong? > > I totally understand it's not possible to just fix the issue. Your best > bet is to convert the draft into a RFC and fix the issue here! ;-)
After checking with Jürgen about RFC 4001 encoding (no better answer!) he confirms that we're missing the variable length length field in our generated OIDs. I'll make a point of filing a PR on this. As noted elsewhere in thread, solving it might be ... interesting. -- Jeff (trivial diff that will generate so much hate mail...) _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
