> On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:15 PM, Jeff Haas <jh...@juniper.net> wrote: > > >> 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.
PR 1265504 -- Jeff _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
