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

RE: Place Holders

Thanks. This looks like a wise and balanced approach. Thanks to everybody for the time and bandwidth consumed on advising on this (rather minor) issue. Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> Sent: 03 July, 2003 2:57 PM
> To: Andy Bierman; Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: Robert Moore; Harrington, David; mibs@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Place Holders
> I personally do not like such/any non-specific reserved OID
> branches. Neither do I like spareseness in OID assignment.
> And so I always mention it when I see it and ask: why?
> And suggest: would it not be better to make it contiguous
> (certainly at PS time this is the last time it can
> easily be done).
> But as stated before, it is not a violation. So Dan, I would
> point it out to the authors and WG and suggest to them to
> (re-)consider if this is wise/wanted. Not that it would block 
> further progress of the document.
> Thanks,
> Bert