On 03/10/10 04:12 PM, Peter Memishian wrote:
> > It seems like this is a bug in Amber Road, best dealt with there.
>
> False.
>
Can you please elaborate. Why is it OK for Amber road to make
assumptions about interface naming?
> > Also, how does this respond in the presence of Clearview Vanity Naming?
>
> Completely orthogonal.
>
>
I'm not sure I agree, but perhaps I'm just not understanding.
To be clear, it seems like a particular product is dependent on the
names of interfaces. Yet, customers ought to be able to rename those
interfaces using vanity names. I'd like to understand how this is
supposed to work together.
- Garrett
