RE: FW: bridgemib wg

> On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 11:51:02PM +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> 
> > I think we can deal with the anonymous. In the sense that we need
> > a statement from someone that he/she tried (at least 2) different
> > vendors. You can mark them as vendor 1, 2, 3, 4, .., n
> > and then what I think I want is to report that Juergen Schonewalder
> > verified that 4 different vendors (known to Juergen) do support
> > the MIB as shows by the walks for vendors 1, 2,...
> > I.e. I do not think we need to publish the vendor names to a
> > public web site or mailing list.
> 
> Ehm, I do not care about the vendor names. I care about the data
> contained in the MIB walks since I will take them from production
> (deployed) systems.
> 
OK, I think if you send email and declare that the output from the walk
looks as if MIB module has been properly and completely implemented,
then I think we're fine.

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