I'm not educated enough to have an opinion on the PWG MIB structure, but
here is a point to consider...
Feedback from our customers has often indicated that "MIB walk"
(sequential access in OID order) needs to present a usable view of a
system and / or its subsystems. This would argue against a "flat" or
"functional" organization because a large body of unrelated information
may lie (in the examples, does lie) sequentially between the MIB for a
project ("subsystem"?) and its later-developed extensions. The "project"
organization seems better able to support this goal.
- Bob Nixon. Emulex Network Systems
----------
From: Ron Bergman[SMTP:rbergma at dpc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 1998 8:49 AM
To: jmp; pwg
Subject: PWG> PWG OID Structure Proposals
----------------------------------------------------
There was considerable email discussion last December regarding the
structure of the OIDs in the PWG enterprises subtree, without a final
resolution. Here is a summary of the proposed PWG OID structures:
1. A flat structure where each item, whether it is a MIB, operations,
attributes, etc, is assigned a number under 2699. For example: