What to do when moving from experimental to PS

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

MIB reviewers/doctors:

If you take a look at:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ops-rfc2786std-00.txt

then you can see that the author wants to keep the MIB under
experimental, even when we were to approve it as PS.
I think this is wrong... but author keeps pushing back

Here is my comment to author and his response:

>>- I think that when we move this MIB to stds track, that it SHOULD
>>   be moved from the experimental branch to the mib-2 branch.
>>   I know that that may cause incompatibilities, but that is exactly
>>   what the IESG note on RFC2786 warns for.
>
>Like I said - there are no substantive changes (and I'll deal with your 
>comments below in a minute) - why force people to make this change?  Its 
>the biggest problem I've encountered with trying to get MIBs through the 
>process.....
>

I think my position is supported by RFC1155, section 3.1 and subsections,
although it does not explicitly state that one could never have a stds
track MIB Module under the experimental tree.

Any supporters (with explanation why) for one or the other approach?

Thanks,
Bert