[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: docsis subscriber mib

Hi -

> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 15:17
> To: Presuhn, Randy; Mreview (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: docsis subscriber mib
> Possibly... the reason why I forwarded was,
> cause they seem to want one common way of doing these
> things and we/they already have a set of RFCs that
> do this in the same way as they are proposing in this 
> new MIB module. 
> So the question becomes:
>  - is it so seriously flawed that we want to force them 
>    to change the way they are doing these resets
>  - if so, then we should make a note so that if they
>    respind the existing RFCs, that we then also force them
>    to deprecate and create a new object.

I think it's not *that* serious a problem.  If they've
established a convention that's working for them, I'm
not going to lose any sleep over it.  Dave Perkins asked
the right questions.  If their environment doesn't need
the kind of assurrances his (or my) proposed approaches
would provide, fine.  There's a range of possible solutions,
and some of them may (or may not) be over-engineered,
depending on their needs.

 Randy Presuhn          BMC Software, Inc.  1-3141
 randy_presuhn@bmc.com  2141 North First Street
 Tel: +1 408 546-1006   San Josť, California 95131  USA
 My opinions and BMC's are independent variables.