RE: Alternative procedure for updating MIB modules

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>]

I am fine with the proposal, if David's amendments are being added. I have one observation In line.

Regards,

Dan



>> > 
> > I suggest that separately-published incremental updates be 
> limited to only
> > APPENDED objects, TCs, compliances, etc. Changes to the 
> original mib (such
> > as changing the enumerations of existing objects or 
> modifying textual
> > conventions) would require an integrated republication (and 
> subsequent
> > obsoletion of the original status).
> > 
> Mmm... in the rmon case we explicitly had added enumerations.
> In fact I would expect that that is one of the more common cases where
> we might want this, namely a few added enumerations with a 
> few additional
> objects to go along with the new enumerations.

I agree with Bert here. Adding enumerations is a very common case. 

> 
> Bert
> > Dbh
> > Dave Harrington
> > dbharrington@comcast.net
> 
>