On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Mike MacFaden wrote: > In this case I don't think this summary counter (ipCidrRouteNumber) > should be discarded in the update. I know of a number of > 2096 implementations and I think this object is frequently > used and possibly more so than the table itself. > > So it is possible the operational burden is greater than the > implementation burden.
If the to-be-deprecated summary counter ipCidrRouteNumber is widely used, then it would seem that there is a very strong case for reinstating the updated summary counter inetCidrRouteNumber as I initially suggested. //cmh -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
