I tend to think of indexs starting at zero. This is mostly because arrays start indexing at zero, and thus using a different base in the messgae will require adjusting the index. While the adjustment is not hard, it is tedious and may be missed in one or two places.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 06:03:40PM +0100, Tom Petch wrote: > Start at one. > > Zero is different, arguably not really a number (so several colleagues > tell me) often used for special purposes such as 'don't know', 'not > really', 'you tell me', 'tbd' etc etc > > SNMP discourages it as an index which, while not directly relevant, > has always felt right to me. > > (Ditto, en passant, the largest possible value, sometimes referred to > as minus one, often used for special purposes etc etc) > > Tom Petch > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Lonvick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 12 September 2003 16:56 > Subject: Issue 5: First Message Number - Still needs review > > > >Issue 5: First Message Number > >http://www.employees.org/~lonvick/draft-ietf-syslog-sign-12.html#firs > tmsg > > > >From Archive: > >http://www.mail-archive.com/syslog-sec%40employees.org/msg01228.html > > > >Similar to Issue 4, should the value of "0" or "1" be used as the > >lowest available value? Albert again suggests "0". Any disagreement > >to that? > > > >STATUS: No direct responses to this issue but Anton Okmianski > suggests > > using "1" as the start for ordinal values. > > > >From the Archive (see point 4) > >http://www.mail-archive.com/syslog-sec%40employees.org/msg01265.html > > > > > > -- Devin Kowatch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
