Subject: Non-member submission from [Bob Stewart <[email-masked]>]

From: "Ted Brunner 503.627.1317" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:46:40 -0700

------- Forwarded Message

Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
X-Sender: [email-masked]
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:19:31 -0400
To: Keith McCloghrie <[email-masked]>
From: Bob Stewart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: split ifmib rfc
Cc: [email-masked] (Gary Hanson), [email-masked], [email-masked],
        [email-masked], [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.96.980623075849.11842N-100000@skeeter>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 11:55 AM 6/23/98 -0700, Keith McCloghrie wrote:
>My understanding of the desire to move the ifStackTable to the new
>document was:
>
>- having all the ifStack stuff in one MIB module, which is desirable,
>  but not necessary, and
>- presuming that there will be vendors who will not implement the
>  ifStackTable allowing such a vendor to be able to say that they
>  support RFC-NNNN, but not RFC-MMMM.
>
>Can we live without these ?

To get the rest to Draft Standard?  I'd say definitely yes.

	Bob

------- End of Forwarded Message