RE: MTA MIB draft06 - AD comment #15

Thomas,

   Based on the last email on the proposed resolution to the original comment #15, you are ok.

   Just to close on open questions, you also wrote:
 > The use of RFC4001 for pktcMtaDevSnmpEntity and friends (limited to
> AddressType dns(16) here) has been considered (and discarded), hasn't
> it? If that's the case, then "no action" seems appropriate.

Noone seems to feel strongly about this one, and the syntax has been as-is since the first drafts. After a quick chat with Eugene, we would like to leave it as-is.

Any other comments on this one?
Jean-François.