. > >> > > >> >As an MSC representative, I would have provided > >> >such a follow-up on the addresses used within > >> >MSC sponsored projects (754, 1394, etc.), as > >> >a duty to my position. > >> > > >> >I prefer to see the evidence before jumping into > >> >denial or conclusions, since (through out my career) > >> >I have seen suboptimal decisions made when this > >> >ordering is reversed. > >> > > >> > >> >If you feel strongly about this, > >> >Yes, I feel strongly about conservation of OUI space. > >> >I naively thoutht that to be the premise of our charter. > >> >Times change, I suppose... > >> > > >> >Cheers, > >> >DVJ > >> > > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From: Geoff Thompson [ mailto:gthompso@nortel.com ] > >> > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 3:07 PM > >> > >> To: Floyd Backes > >> > >> Cc: dvj@alum.mit.edu; Geoff Thompson; a.n.weaver@IEEE.ORG; > >> > >> stds-rac@IEEE.ORG > >> > >> Subject: RE: Request for multiple OUI assignments > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> At 11:48 AM 8/8/2007 , Floyd Backes wrote: > >> > >> >If you feel strongly about this, you could review the > >> latest version of > >> > >> >802.1 MAC Bridging, figure out how it can be made to work > >> using the same > >> > >> >MAC address on every port, get a PAR to update the > >> standard, and then > >> > >> >slug it out with Mick over the ensuing 2 years to produce a revised > >> > >> >standard.