dougm@WARTHOG.NCSL.NIST.GOV (Doug Montgomery) (10/09/90)
As a result of the Sydney WG2 meeting, the proposed amendment to ISO 8348/Add2 to remove the preferred decimal encoding will be sent out for ballot as ISO 8348/PDAM 4. This admendment does not preclude the use of the decimal encoding, it simply removes its specification (and the corresponding requirement that all NSAPs can be encoded using it) from the scope of the Addressing Addendum. This requirement was the limiting factor in the restrictions placed upon the length of DSPs with binary abstract syntax. (You can look at the scheme for decimal encoding of DSPs with binary abstract syntax [8.3.2.d] and verify that the values given in table 3 represent the largest (measured in octets) binary value that can be encoded into a 40 decimal digit NSAP after encoding the IDP). Another minor change proposed by PDAM4 is in the reference publication format. The symbol "+" will be used instead of "/" to separate the IDP from the DSP in the reference publication format. The amendment has received only positive feedback during its discussion at the Sydney meeting and previous comment period. It should progress through the ballot process fairly quickly. dougm +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Doug Montgomery dougm@osi3.ncsl.nist.gov | | National Institute of Standards and Technology | | Technology Building, B-217 Voice: +1-301-975-3630 | | Gaithersburg, MD 20899 USA Fax: +1-301-975-2128 | +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
tozz@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Bob Tausworthe) (10/11/90)
> / hpindda:comp.protocols.iso / dougm@WARTHOG.NCSL.NIST.GOV (Doug Montgomery) / 9:52 am Oct 9, 1990 / > As a result of the Sydney WG2 meeting, the proposed amendment to ISO > 8348/Add2 to remove the preferred decimal encoding will be sent out for > ballot as ISO 8348/PDAM 4. > > This admendment does not preclude the use of the decimal encoding, it > simply removes its specification (and the corresponding requirement > that all NSAPs can be encoded using it) from the scope of the > Addressing Addendum. This requirement was the limiting factor in > the restrictions placed upon the length of DSPs with binary > abstract syntax. (You can look at the scheme for decimal encoding of > DSPs with binary abstract syntax [8.3.2.d] and verify that the values given > in table 3 represent the largest (measured in octets) binary value that > can be encoded into a 40 decimal digit NSAP after encoding the IDP). > This always confuses me. Let me get this straight. They are removing the decimal encoding recommendation, NOT the decimal abstract syntax, right? If they removed the decimal abstract syntax then they would they would also need to change the spec so that zero-length DSPs can be used with binary AFI formats Bob Tausworthe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- the following opinions are my own, unfortunately, not my employer's