Re: Entity MIB v3

On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 04:08:36PM -0500, David B Harrington wrote:

[...]
 
> To clarify my position - entPhysicalUris hasn't been sufficiently
> justified or specified to be included in the entity mib; we should
> eliminate it.

Now this is a clear statement. I do not agree but that is fine.
It is now time for others to speak up and if I am the clear minority
here because nobody cares, then go ahead and nuke the definition.

/js

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