[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: snmpconf IETF 49 SNMPconf WG notes

Hi -

> Message-ID: <3A4BA0C4.C0413068@longsys.com>
> Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 15:21:24 -0500
> From: Rob Frye <rfrye@longsys.com>
> Organization: Longitude Systems, Inc.
> To: minutes@ietf.org, SNMPconf Working Group <snmpconf@snmp.com>
> Subject: snmpconf IETF 49 SNMPconf WG notes
> - A question was raised about whether this language
> definition & SMING should be combined, or at least use
> the SMIng functions in the SNMPconf language.  However, SMING is data
> definition oriented, whereas the SNMPconf policy language is operator
> oriented, which makes SMING inappropriate at present for the
> SNMPconf expression language.  Furthermore, because of the state of
> it is not yet possible for SNMPconf drafts to make reference to SMING
> documents, other than as "works in progress".  Therefore, between the
> C/C++
> issues and SMING issues, we should stick with the C reference and then
> add
> the items we need from C++.  There may be further discussion on the list
> about this, if anyone disagrees with this approach.

The question was how / whether SMING data types would be
referenced from the scripting language, not whether the
languages should somehow be combined.

 Randy Presuhn           randy_presuhn@bmc.com
 Voice: +1 408 546-1006  BMC Software, Inc.  1-3141
 Fax:   +1 408 965-0359  2141 North First Street
 http://www.bmc.com/     San Josť, California 95131  USA
 My opinions and BMC's are independent variables.