RE: New MIB review guidelines draft now available

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

On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> Does anyone of the MIB Doctor team have (major) objections
> if I issue an IETF wide 4-week Last Call for BCP for this doc?

My only misgiving is that there is a known open issue ... namely,
the ongoing work in the IPR WG to update RFC 2026 will cause some
things in the review guidelines doc to be obsoleted.  Specifically,
the instructions to copy verbatim the notices in RFC 2026 Section 10
will have to change to point instead to the notices in the new RFCs
coming out of the IPR WG.  I think there will also be some new
disclosure-related notices that will be needed in Internet-Drafts,
and that will _definitely_ affect some of the stuff we do (i.e., we
will have to check that they are there).

If I thought that the IPR WG's stuff was still a few months away, I
would be happy with the idea of just documenting what we do now and
then issuing another update to the MIB review guidelines document.
But I think that the new IPR documents are likely to clear the RFC
pub queue before we could get the guidelines doc through, and then
we'd have to put significant revisions in the guidelines doc.  That
would probably force us back to another last call, so I'm not sure
we'd accomplish anything by going to last call now.  I might also
add that when I suggested somehting along the same lines for
rfc2223bis (guidelines for rfc authors) in private mail to the IESG
and the RFC Editor a few months ago, the response was that it was
already decided that 2223bis should wait for the IPR WG to get done.
It seems that the same considerations would apply here.

Having said all that, if you still want to go ahead, it's fine by
me ... I'll just expect that it's really next-to-last call.

Thanks,

Mike