Re: clarify that MIB review requirements are targeted at standards-trackdocuments

["C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>]

[ in reply to comments/review <draft-ietf-ops-mib-review-guidelines-00.txt> ]

On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> - Sect 3 talks about need for IPR section.
>   I believe such is only required for stds track and bcp docs
>   It is allowed in other docs, but not required I think.

Indeed, according to RFC 2026 the notices are required for
standards track documents, and that's Section 3.4 says.  I
guess what you are objecting to is the language in Section 3
which precedes it which just says "IETF specifications
containing MIB modules" and not "IETF standards-track
specifications containing MIB modules".

I guess you are right, and there are (at least) two places where
this needs to be changed.  In Section 1, "Introduction", I need to
change the first sentence so that it says

   Some time ago the IESG instituted a policy of requiring OPS area
   review of IETF standards-track specifications containing MIB modules. 

(s/all IETF/IETF standards-track/).  And in Section 3, I should change
I need to change the first sentence so that it says

   In general, IETF standards-track specifications containing MIB
   modules MUST conform to the requirements for IETF standard-track
   RFCs documented in [RFC2223bis].

(s/IETF/IETF standards-track/g).

Will these changes address your concerns?

Mike