RE: MIB module terminology

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

I can agree with:
> >  "The value 0, when used in a MIB, [ ... ]"
> >
> >be changed to
> >
> >  "The value 0, when used in a MIB module, [ ... ]"
> 
> I agree that MIB module should be used instead of MIB.
> I was only suggesting that module can be left out when
> referring to a particular MIB module (e.g., FOO MIB).
> 
> Andy
> 
And even more when you talk about FOO-MIB where it is the name
of the FOO-MIB module.

So I may have been too picky a few times. But when I read some
documents, it is really strange how they use the term MIB and MIBs.
Specifically the plural "MIBs" get people confused I think.

I think that when I see an occasional mis-use of the term MIB 
instead of MIB module that I do not bother people too much. 
It is when I see people consistently mis-use the term in their
documents that I tell them that in principle we have one (single)
MIB which is composed of multiple MIB modules and that one or
more MIB modules are described in MIB documents.

Hope this explains
Bert