On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 09:51 -0500, James Carlson wrote: > Peter Memishian writes: > > * Section 5.18: To ensure IPMP-unaware MIB applications won't trip over > > IPMP test address information, a synthetic EXPER_IP_AND_TESTHIDDEN > > MIB level has been added. > > This will remove information that used to show up in the MIB, and thus > cause a small loss of observability for IPMP machines managed by SNMP. > > I think we should have ARC advice added to the opinion: management > needs to be advised that while this is an improvement in accuracy of > the data, it's also a regression, and that we need to have updates to > the SNMP implementation to support IPMP (perhaps via a private MIB).
Do you think that we should discuss the changes in a meeting and hold an in-person vote, or would an email vote as originally proposed be adequate? At this point, I'm not exactly sure who is in a position to vote on this case as the PSARC membership landscape has changed since the case was originally reviewed... -Seb
