Re: MALLOC MIB

Dave Thaler wrote:
> The argument for removing it is that without an experimental/
> proprietary protocol, there is no use for the exclusion table.
> With an experimental/proprietary method, you already have
> experimental/proprietary stuff so it seems reasonable to
> get "overall status" the same way.  (E.g. from a directory
> you mention, or from a MIB specific to the experimental
> protocol, or whatever).

Dave,
     I agree with you.  Whenever someone comes up with a new
protocol, they can define the ways to get the information out
of it.  So, I vote to remove the exclusion table.

Brian