Re: FW: bridgemib wg

On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 04:52:13PM +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
 
> > I do not really feel qualified to do a real technical review (but there
> > should not be major technical changes anyway to move this forward to
> > Standard). Of course, we still would need to put together a deployment
> > report. I know that people usually dislike to write such reports, it
> > really should not be a big deal to get something together since this
> > MIB is used in all enterprise networks I have seen.
> > 
> But it feels same as with BGP MIB, which was supposedly very widely
> implemented and it took 4 or 5 years to get a report from (4) vendors.
> Sih...

Do you want vendor reports or deployment reports? This MIB really is
everywhere. I have personally seem and exchanged packets with 
implementations shippend in HP, 3Com, Cisco, Nortel, Lucent, Avaya, 
Netgear, Riverstone and perhaps a bunch of other that I do not
recall at the moment. And I have seen these deployed in at least 
three different Universities (and a bunch of hotels - but they
probably don't know and so they do perhaps not count). If it is
not possible to get a _deployment_ report written for this MIB,
then we indeed have a problem.

I will send out some messages on some news channels to see whether
there are some folks to help us in this matter..

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany