Re: Welcome to the MIB Reviewers mailing list

[Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>]

At 05:36 PM 10/1/2002 +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>When you receive this email, it means that you were already
>subscribed or that I just subscribed you. That means, I do
>consider you a one of my MIB Doctors who I can ask to do
>MIB reviews. These are sometime prelimenary reviews, but
>most of the time they are the reviews that take place
>just before an AD (no matter which area) decides to accept
>an I-D and requests IETF Last Call. 
>
>Instead of asking people individually to do a specific review,
>I'd like to try to post the MIBs that need review to this
>list and then each of you MIB doctors can "claim" one if
>you see one that interests you. I will then make the assignment.
>Of course anyone who wants to do additional review can always do
>so... the more eyes that look at a particular MIB, the better
>chance (I hope) that we find all the serious issues.
>
>In general, my selection is based on:
>- the MIB Doctor who acts as IESG reviewer should not have been
>  heavily involved in the development of the MIB to be reviewed
>- if you have some expertise in the technology that the MIB is
>  trying to model, then that is a pre
>- it is not a requirement to be well versed in the technology
>  that the MIB is trying to model. In principle you should be
>  able to understand the MIB even as a novice. And you can 
>  always ask questions to the authors/editors/wg, because I
>  assume that they do have the technology-specific expertise.

One of the hats I wear at Cisco is MIB Cop, so I'm pretty
familiar with the procedure.  One thing we need to know
at the start of any review is whether the MIB is new or
if it is an update.  This should be obvious from the
compliance section, but only if the MIB has been updated
properly.  If it is an update, then the updated RFC
containing the previously published MIB module is also needed.

Andy



>Another use if this list I see is that if one of us is reviewing
>a specific MIB and has questions that he/she wants to check with
>peer-MIB doctors, then we can use this list.
>
>What I have not yet decided is if it would be good to post a review
>to this list first (for peer-cross-check) before we send it off
>to the requesting authors/AD/WG. That might be a good thing to do
>so that we get a better and more consistent review. Opinions welcome.
>
>I am somewhat behind in MIB reviews. So over the next few days I
>will post some requests for review from MIBs that have been in my
>queue for too long.
>
>Thanks,
>Bert 
>p.s. If you do not want to continue to be conbsidered a MIB-doctor
>     or if you are not willing to do a review once in while, you
>     can either unsubscribe from this list (majordomo@ops.ietf.org)
>     or you can let me know privately.