RE: [Ltru] Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Ta g MIB) to Proposed Standard
Hi Bill, Yes - from the IEEE/ISTO Printer Working Group, see the Job Monitoring MIB (RFC 2707) which defined the textual convention 'JmNaturalLanguageTagTC' on page 69. It uses max length 63 octets to be consistent with the earlier Internet Printing Protocol/1.0 (RFC 2566, now RFC 2911) that defined the datatype 'naturalLanguage' on page 67, also of max length 63 octets. Various printer vendor enterprise MIBs have imported this RFC 2707 textual convention or used this same max length (I wrote them at Xerox and Sharp, but I've seen others). Cheers, - Ira Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG Blue Roof Music / High North Inc PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 phone: +1-906-494-2434 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Bill Fenner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 7:29 PM To: McDonald, Ira Cc: John Cowan; Doug Ewell; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; LTRU Working Group; ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Ta g MIB) to Proposed Standard On 2/10/07, McDonald, Ira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With respect to max length of 60, the public MIBs that I'm aware of often use 63 octets Do you have any pointers? I searched my MIB object database for objects named *Language* or with DESCRIPTIONS with Language inside, and only got the IP-MROUTE-MIB and MALLOC-MIB ones. The MALLOC-MIB one was interesting, since it uses IPMROUTE-STD-MIB::LanguageTag(1..94). Thanks, Bill -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.4/705 - Release Date: 2/27/2007 3:24 PM ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [Ltru] Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Ta g MIB) to Proposed Standard
On 2/27/07, McDonald, Ira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes - from the IEEE/ISTO Printer Working Group, see the Job Monitoring MIB (RFC 2707) which defined the textual convention 'JmNaturalLanguageTagTC' Ah, silly me, I forgot that I hadn't written the part that populates the database with TCs yet. I wrote that part and indeed found JmNaturalLanguageTagTC. Interestingly, I couldn't find any objects that used this TC, in Job-Monitoring-MIB or any MIB published in an RFC. Bill ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [Ltru] Re: Last Call: draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib (Language Ta g MIB) to Proposed Standard
On 2/10/07, McDonald, Ira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With respect to max length of 60, the public MIBs that I'm aware of often use 63 octets Do you have any pointers? I searched my MIB object database for objects named *Language* or with DESCRIPTIONS with Language inside, and only got the IP-MROUTE-MIB and MALLOC-MIB ones. The MALLOC-MIB one was interesting, since it uses IPMROUTE-STD-MIB::LanguageTag(1..94). Thanks, Bill ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
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. The DESCRIPTION clause of this textual convention could disallow the length of '1', but it's not important to do, I think. With respect to max length of 60, the public MIBs that I'm aware of often use 63 octets and the rest use a longer max length (except for the admittedly flawed legacy objects in Printer MIB v2, RFC 3805 - I tried to fix them before we published RFC 3805, but got shot down by my co-editors). Cheers, - Ira Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG Blue Roof Music / High North Inc PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 phone: +1-906-494-2434 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: John Cowan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 1:16 PM To: Doug Ewell Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; LTRU Working Group; ietf@ietf.org Subject: [Ltru] 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 ___ Ltru mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 2/9/2007 4:06 PM ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
