On 17/04/2008, grant mills wrote:
> Is this retention of the old MIB variables intentional, or will they be
> removed in a later release?

It's intentional.
The cost of retaining/maintaing this code is minimal,
since it is typically just an alternative interface to data
which would be needed for the replacement MIBs.

Removing such objects would inevitably lead to an
increase in support load, answering questions about
"where has this information gone?"

If a particular MIB variable is fundamentally broken,
then we would remove it (as has happened with the
relocatable "exec" output).
But if it's simply been replaced by an improved version,
then there's nothing really to be gained by withdrawing
the old code.

That's my (personal) take on this, anyway.


This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
Net-snmp-users mailing list
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options: