Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Tag MIB) to Proposed Standard
Since tags of 1 character are never well-formed, I suggest that the definition: SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..60)) be amended to exclude the 1-character case. I assume that a zero-length tag, while also not defined in RFC 4646, was included in the I-D to allow the special case of no tag. AFAIK, ASN.1 does not allow sizes like (0, 2..60). I wouldn't even bother with this change. I tried this: FooString ::= OCTET STRING (SIZE (0 | 2..60)) And, it worked with two different ASN.1 compilers. Russ ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Tag MIB) to Proposed Standard
Doug Ewell scripsit: Since tags of 1 character are never well-formed, I suggest that the definition: SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..60)) be amended to exclude the 1-character case. I assume that a zero-length tag, while also not defined in RFC 4646, was included in the I-D to allow the special case of no tag. AFAIK, ASN.1 does not allow sizes like (0, 2..60). I wouldn't even bother with this change. -- John Cowan[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://ccil.org/~cowan Rather than making ill-conceived suggestions for improvement based on uninformed guesses about established conventions in a field of study with which familiarity is limited, it is sometimes better to stick to merely observing the usage and listening to the explanations offered, inserting only questions as needed to fill in gaps in understanding. --Peter Constable ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Tag MIB) to Proposed Standard
Hi - From: McDonald, Ira [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Feb 11, 2007 4:15 AM To: 'John Cowan' [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Ewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], LTRU Working Group [EMAIL PROTECTED], ietf@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Ta g MIB) to Proposed Standard Hi, Right - ASN.1 doesn't allow discontinuous integer ranges. ... No. In a SIZE qualifier, a discontiguous range is perfectly legal ASN.1 There are examples of this in RFC 2579, among others. In this particular case, something like SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0 | 2..60)) (replacing 60 with whatever the consensus upper bound should be) would seem appropriate. Randy ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Tag MIB) to Proposed Standard
The IESG iesg dash secretary at ietf dot org wrote: The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'Language Tag MIB ' draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib-01.txt as a Proposed Standard This document defines a profile of RFC 4646 language tags for use in a particular application, by restricting the tags to lowercase and no more than 60 characters in length. There is a recommended casing convention described in RFC 4646, section 2.1 (e.g. hmn-Latn-LA), but tags are not intended to be case-sensitive, and applications such as this one may choose a different convention if it suits them. Section 4.3 of RFC 4646 discusses tag length limitations and suggests a minimum length limit of 42 characters. The proposed limit of 60 characters in the I-D is greater than that minimum, and much greater than the likely maximum length of any non-private-use tag, and should pose no problem. Since tags of 1 character are never well-formed, I suggest that the definition: SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..60)) be amended to exclude the 1-character case. I assume that a zero-length tag, while also not defined in RFC 4646, was included in the I-D to allow the special case of no tag. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Tag MIB) to Proposed Standard
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, The IESG wrote: The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'Language Tag MIB ' draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib-01.txt as a Proposed Standard The title seems to suggest that the document defines managed objects for managing language tags, which is not the case. In order to prevent confusion, I would recommend that the title be changed to: A Textual Convention for Representing Language Tags In the same vein, I would recommend LANGTAG-TC-MIB for the module name and langTagTcMIB for the descriptor representing the MODULE-IDENTITY value. Note that these recommendations are consistent with the (non-binding) advice in Appendix C of RFC 4181 (the MIB review guidelines). //cmh ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Tag MIB) to Proposed Standard
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'Language Tag MIB ' draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib-01.txt as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2007-03-08. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib-01.txt IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_iddTag=15469rfc_flag=0 ___ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
