Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:50:13PM +0000, Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE) wrote: > > [...] > > > In order to correctly compile (using confdc) we also need to import > > iana-entity for the identities defined in there. However this is leading a > > circular dependency: > > > > 1. Iana-entity imports ietf-entity (to 'resolve' > > entity-physical-class) > > > > 2. Ietf-entity imports iana-entity (to obtain the indentities defined > > in there) > > > > One way to solve this is to move the definition of entity-physical-class > > from ietf-entity to iana-entity which would resolve the fact that > > iana-entity requires an import of ietf-entity (ietf-entity needs to import > > iana-entity anyhow, so it can also pick the typedef from the same module > > too). > > I think moving the definition of entity-physical-class into > iana-entity makes sense.
Ok. It feels a bit backwards to me though, but I can see the value of having the iana module self-contained. /martin > Perhaps this is generally a good pattern to > follow for base identities for which IANA maintains derived > identities. The required import should not be a problem; the > ENTITY-MIB also imports from IANA-ENTITY-MIB. _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
