[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Update for WG on status of draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-05.txt

Dear ipdvb WG,
This email contains a short update on the progress of the DVB-RCS MIB (submitted as an individual informational document). The document has already started MIB Doctor review, but was returned to the authors to apply corrections. In the mean-time, we have seen also a change of I-D boilerplate and a change of responsible AD (now Jari Arkko).
The authors have recently submitted an updated revision of the draft (-05 in the I-D archive), and therefore I shall request the MIB Review to resume. 

Best wishes,

Gorry Fairhurst
May we have a new version that addresses this naming convention issue so that we can continue?
It looks like the document has been sitting for a few months due to this hangup, apologies for not forwarding this issue on to you immediately (store and forward through an overloaded AD is not the best manner of getting a message from one person to another, but that's another issue - it was my ultimate responsibility and for that I apologize). 

- Mark

Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:

*/Mark,/*
*//* */Can we have this issue fixed? /*
*//* */The recommended naming conventions for MIB objects and modules are described in Appendix C of RFC 4181. In general, RFC 4181 should be mandatory reading for everybody writing and reviewing MIB documents. /* 
*//* */Dan/*
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
    *From:* Bert Wijnen (IETF) [mailto:bertietf@bwijnen.net]
    *Sent:* Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:09 PM
    *To:* Romascanu, Dan (Dan); MIB Doctors (E-mail)
    *Cc:* Mark Townsley
    *Subject:* Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Call for a volunteer to
reviewhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt 

    Only having taken a very very cursory browse of this doc, I DO
    have one
    SERIOUS concern. And that is that all the object names
    (descriptors) do
    not follow ANY naming convention.
I would URGE them to prefix all their descriptors with a common prefix 
    that will help avoid naming conflicts in the future.
         I am not sure if/when I will have time to do a close review.
    But I would recommend that they do that proper naming FIRST before
    anyone
    spends too much time on this
         Bert

        ----- Original Message -----
        *From:* Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <mailto:dromasca@avaya.com>
        *To:* MIB Doctors (E-mail) <mailto:mib-doctors@ietf.org>
        *Cc:* Mark Townsley <mailto:townsley@cisco.com>
        *Sent:* Sunday, November 16, 2008 11:47 PM
        *Subject:* [MIB-DOCTORS] Call for a volunteer to
reviewhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt 

        MIB Doctors,

        We need a volunteer to perform a MIB Doctor review on the I-D
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt 
        .
        This is an AD-sponsored contribution targeting Informational RFC,
        sponsored by Mark Townsley.

        Thanks and Regards,

        Dan
        _______________________________________________
        MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
        MIB-DOCTORS@ietf.org <mailto:MIB-DOCTORS@ietf.org>
        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors