[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: snmpconf comments should never include technical descriptions
>>>>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 13:09:39 -0800, "David T. Perkins" <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
>> One approach that I use is to use the DESCRIPTION clause of the
>> MODULE-IDENTITY construct to describe the MIB module and list
>> abbreviations that the MIB module reader would find useful.
>> The text to put in the RFC before a MIB module is background
>> and explanations. It is for the reader that has not yet read
>> the MIB module. The content of the MIB module is really a
>> reference for people that have already read the document (RFC),
>> and assumes that the background concepts are understood.
>> That is, all the text in an RFC before a MIB module MUST not
>> be moved to the DESCRIPTION clause of the MODULE-IDENTITY!
David, I wasn't trying to imply that no text what so ever should go in
the RFC. Some things, like background information, makes sense. Some
things do not.
I don't remember the exact example, but one of the MIBS from the main
SNMPv3 RFCs (2570-2575) has (had?) the usage for the table in the
elements of procedure section above and the description clause for the
table didn't indicate how the data was to be used. If I get the
chance, I'll go look through it again, but its a lot of text to