RE: clarify that MIB review requirements are targeted at standards-track documents but are useful for other documents

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

Works for me (wfm)

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. M. Heard [mailto:heard@pobox.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 11 februari 2003 22:32
> To: Mreview (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: clarify that MIB review requirements are targeted at
> standards-track documents but are useful for other documents
> 
> 
> [ note expansion of subject line :) ]
> 
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> > I do get the point (I think). At the other hand, I do 
> > want this doc to be considered seriously by other people
> > doing MIB work and when we get to review such other MIB
> > work, I think we'd still try to take these guidelines
> > (as you also say below). Can we add maybe something to the
> > abstract aka:
> > 
> >   Although some rules/guidelines may not be applicable to
> >   non-standards track or non-IETF MIB documents, a MIB
> >   review will still be done with most of these rules/guidelines
> >   as the starting point.
> 
> I'm not terribly keen on that change as written because (a) it
> makes the abstract rather long and (b) because the document
> should not make assertions like "will be used" in places where
> its use is discretionary.
> 
> So, how about this instead:
> 
> Abstract
> 
>    This memo provides guidelines for authors and reviewers of IETF
>    standards-track specifications containing MIB modules.  Applicable
>    portions may used as a basis for reviews of other MIB documents.
> 
> 1.  Introduction
> 
>    Some time ago the IESG instituted a policy of requiring OPS area
>    review of all IETF standards-track specifications containing MIB
>    modules.  These reviews were established to ensure that such
>    specifications follow established IETF documentation practices and
>    that the MIB modules they contain meet certain generally accepted
>    standards of quality, including (but not limited to) 
> compliance with
>    all syntactic and semantic requirements of SMIv2 (STD 58) [RFC2578]
>    [RFC2579] [RFC2580] that are applicable to "standard" MIB modules.
>    The purpose of this memo is to document the guidelines that are
>    followed in such reviews.
> 
>    [ leave 2nd paragraph as is ]
> 
>    Although some of the guidelines in this memo are not applicable to
>    non-standards track or non-IETF MIB documents, authors and 
> reviewers
>    of those documents should consider using the ones that do apply.
> 
> I'm sure this could be improved, and suggestions for doing so
> are solicited.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mike
> 
>