Re: MTA MIB draft06 - AD comment #38

Jean-Francois Mule wrote:
> Proposed new text:
> pktcMtaDevSnmpEntity
>          The MTA must resolve the FQDN value before its very first
>          network interaction with the SNMP entity during the
>          provisioning phase as specified in the PacketCable MTA Device
>          Provisioning specification.

Fine with me. Then, still, why is the first part needed to address 
comment #38 here (pktcMtaDevSnmpEntity), but not for pktcMtaDevCmsFqdn 
where you proposed:

> pktcMtaDevCmsFqdn
>            The MTA must resolve the CMS FQDN as required
>            by the corresponding PacketCable Specifications."

?


+Thomas

-- 
Thomas Anders (thomas.anders at blue-cable.de)