Re: DECnet MIB question (3)

[[e-mail]]

Art,

I read your comments about the AdjCircuitIndex and agree that we probably need
to add 1 more object to the Adjacency Table.  I still think this can be done
without multiple indicies (If everyone wants them [two indicies] then we can 
put it in). 

We can rename the phivAdjCircuitIndex to be phivAdjIndex as you suggest with
exactly the same description I put out yesturday.  I agree with your point
about a better connection with circuit.  So -- the object that I would add is
the INDEX value of the Circuit Parameters Table which is PhivCircuitIndex.  I
was going to suggest phivCircuitCommonName from that same table, but thought
that this might be better.  I am suggesting the PhivCircuitIndex as a value in
the adjacency table not as an additional index otherwise we would have two
indicies again - I may be talking myself into having two?

Does anybody else have a preference??

/jon