Subject: [OPSAWG] Fw: I-D Action:draft-presuhn-floats-03.txt

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 11:57:48 -0800

Hi -

Updated with text based on recent discussion about
usage guidelines.

Randy

> From: <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 11:30 AM
> Subject: I-D Action:draft-presuhn-floats-03.txt
>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> 
> Title           : Textual Conventions for the Representation of Floating-Point Numbers
> Author(s)       : R. Presuhn
> Filename        : draft-presuhn-floats-03.txt
> Pages           : 8
> Date            : 2010-12-09
> 
> This memo defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module
> containing textual conventions (TCs) to represent floating-point
> numbers.
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-presuhn-floats-03.txt
...

---

From: Robert Story <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 15:41:59 -0500

On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 11:57:48 -0800 Randy wrote:
RP> Updated with text based on recent discussion about
RP> usage guidelines.

I like the new text. I do wonder about two things. First, should the
trade-off discussion be in the introduction? I'd think it would belong
later in the document, specifically, after section 2. Also, I think the
wording is a little confusing. This:

   The selection of a floating-point format involves many considerations
   and trade-offs.

reads like it's the start of a discussion of how the decision was made
to use IEEE 754 as the basis for the TCs, when it's really advice for
MIB designers. Maybe:

   The selection of which floating-point TC to use in a MIB module involves
   many considerations and trade-offs.

Second, while most of the tradeoffs affect MIB designers, I think the
warning about index ordering will likely be a source of confusion for
the end users. We all know what the chances are that they'll read the
RFC. I suggest that we add the warning to the TC descriptions. There
have been other objects defined that include potential issues with
using a TC as in index (e.g. InetAddress, though admittedly that is
pointing out a protocol issue, not an end-user issue). Just a thought.

-- 
Robert Story
Senior Software Engineer
SPARTA (dba Cobham Analytic Soloutions)