>I'm not sure I correctly understand the use of syntax productID in the
>Devices Table of the HR MIB.
The official intent, at the time of the original Host MIB
specification many years ago was for a public registry of hardware
components. However, as you may well already know, that sort of
public registry was never practical and has never been implemented by
any hardware vendor.
>Let's say I have an internal registry as recommended by the RFC. So
>one of my NICs is
W/o the public availability of it, management software vendors (and
even 3rd party agent vendors) would never be able programtically find
the links and infer semantics in a non hard-coded manner.
>I'd like to know the "official" intent, however. Thanks. Maybe it's
>already spelled out somewhere that I didn't find.
I think that this point, and at this late stage of the game, its not
worth worry about. Most implementations just return 0.0.
This kind of feedback is exactly what I wanted when I started this
process almost 1.5 years (?) ago. The fact that anyone is just now
reading the damn document after having given me so much crap about
moving the document forward so slowly speaks for itself. Big sigh.
Do you guys want to move the Host MIB forward or what?
Bobby
rdk@empiretech.com