Re: [libsmi] Re: smilint remembers named number in OID value assignment

["David T. Perkins" <dperkins@dsperkins.com>]

HI,

this is quick - got to run, but consider:

with ::= { goo foo(1) }

can you import foo in another MIB module (answer NO)

Also, what do you do with the following:
   foo OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { goo 1 }
   bar OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { goo 1 }
   soo OBJECT-TYPE ... ::= { goo 1 }

Hint: it's legal.

Regards,
/david t. perkins

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Frank Strauß wrote:

> David T. Perkins wrote:
> 
> > The message below is not correct. That is, it is not a warning
> > situtuation and the term "object identifier" is not at all
> > appropriate.
> > 
> > I suggest the folloing text, if you still want to emit this
> > bogus warning. 
> > 
> > So, for 
> >   bar OBJECT-TYPE 
> >      ....
> >      ::= { gar foo(3) }
> > and
> >   soo OBJECT-TYPE
> >      ....
> >      ::= { gar foo(4) }
> > 
> > Emit the following messages:
> > ./XXX-MIB:165: warning: local label "foo" used for OID value of
> > "soo" has been previously used with a different sub-identifier value
> > ./XXX-MIB:40: info: previous definition of `snmpDot3MauMgt'
> 
> >From my point of view, the messages currently implemented and quoted below are
> more precisely describing the facts: such labels always refer to a complete OID
> (derived from a subid and a prefix), hence I don't like the term "used with a
> different sub-identifier value". E.g. in the following example, it would be
> misleading to refer to a sub-identifier instead of an OID, because the
> sub-identifier is the same (3) but a warning should be raised because the OID
> is different (gar.1.3 vs. gar.3):
> 
> bar OBJECT-TPYE ... := { gar boo(1) foo(3) }
> soo OBJECT-TPYE ... := { gar foo(3) }
> 
> 
> > But again, the above is NOT illegal and it is fine to have
> > the following OID values:
> >    ::= { gar foo(1) foo(2) bar(3) bar(4) }
> >  ...
> >    ::= { gar bar(1) guw(2) foo(3) foo(4) }
> >  ...
> >    ::= { gar foo(2) }
> >  ...
> >    ::= { gar bar(2) }
> >  etc
> 
> Ack. That's why we emit a warning, not an error. We had already this discussion
> for several other warnings on the libsmi mailinglist. People, who only want to
> know whether a MIB module is formally and syntactically correct (without any
> additional "hints"), should use the "-l" option to set the threshold level of
> displayed messages.
> 
> 
> > On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Frank Strauß wrote:
> > 
> >> Thanks to all who contributed to this issue. I've just comitted a new
> >> revision to the libsmi SVN repository that handles OID and identifiers in the
> >> "NameAndNumberForm" more acurately, and also emits warnings such as...
> >> 
> >> ./XXX-MIB:165: warning: object identifier for label `snmpDot3MauMgt' does not
> >> match previous label usage
> >> ./XXX-MIB:40: info: previous definition of `snmpDot3MauMgt'
> >> 
> >> ./XXX-MIB:165: warning: label `snmpDot3MauMgtXXX' does not match previous
> >> label `snmpDot3MauMgt' for same object identifier
> >> ./XXX-MIB:40: info: previous definition of `snmpDot3MauMgt'
> 
> 
> -- 
> !! This message is brought to you via the `libsmi' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or adjust
> !! your settings, send a mail message to <libsmi-request@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
> !! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/libsmi.
>