RE: MIB doctor reviews and common format for RFC Editor Notes

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

> > My concern is, it's really hard to do a grep on those comments
> > to address them or to create a vim syntax file (VI improved) so
> > that they pop up in red during the final reviews.
> > 
> > Is it worth imposing some kind of common convention?
> 
> Speaking for myself, I'd rather not because it makes another rule to
> enforce, but if enough other folks feel the other way I'll happily
> defer to those wished.  FWIW, when I am doing a MIB review I don't
> squawk when people deviate from the above forms as long as the notes
> look obvious enough for the RFC Editor and the IANA liason to find.
> 
The important point is that RFC-Editor can see what needs to be done.
They go through the whole doc (as far as I know), so as long as the
text is clear that they need to do something, then it is fine.

The IANA people often scan a doc for the string IANA and for the
IANA considerations section to see if they need to make assignments 
and to check if the instructions are clear.

I would hate us to prescribe an exact format of how to specify all
of this. That sounds like adding CLRs instead of removing some.

Bert
> Mike
>