Shawn Routhier wrote: > I believe that use of "AdminStatus" in ipv4InterfaceAdminStatus and > ipv6InterfaceAdminStatus is confusing. [...] > My current position is that as I need to make changes anyway I may as > well include this change. > > If there is no discussion I shall change the names of these objects. If > you feel that the names of these objects should not be changed send mail > by the deadline that the chairs specify.
I agree with this change. > For issue 2 we have the following discussion: > For all instances for which it is defined, i.e., all values of i, I > believe > the value of ipv6InterfacePhysicalAddress.i is always same as the value of > ifPhysAddress.i > > Thus, it is redundant, right ? [...] > If there is no discussion I shall remove this object. If you feel it is > a useful object and should be kept send mail by the deadline that the > chairs > specify. FWIW, I made exactly the same comment. I agree it should be either removed or deprecated, as appropriate. -Dave -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
