Subject: default priority suggestion

From: David Battle <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 15:20:07 -0400 (EDT)

>It seems like we might want to not require the *lowest* priority as
>the default.  What if an operator was faced with the following
>situation:

>subagent A which registers some mib region at the default priority
>and has no option for registering it at a different priority

>subagent B which registers the same mib region at the default
>priority but *does* provide a mechanism for registering at
>a different priority

>The operator would like for subagent A to "win" regardless of the order
>in which the two subagents are started.  How does he do this?  Since
>the default is the lowest, there is no way to "get in under" this
>default priority.  If the default were an intermediate value
>then there would be room to "override" it with a higer priority or
>"hide behind it" with a lower priority.

(Originally a message to Mike Daniele directly, he requested I
post it to the list).

-David