Status of MIB review guidelines draft

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

Colleages,

The current MIB review guidelines draft

http://www1.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ops-mib-review-guidelines-02.txt

was placed into the I-D repository on Mon Aug 25 10:02:25 2003 -0400 (EDT)
and (per announced policy) expires on Fri Feb 27 09:02:25 2004 -0500 (EST).
It therefore needs to be refreshed (or otherwise prevented from expiring)
before then.

As some of you may recall, Bert proposed sending this document to
IETF last call when it was submitted last August, but I pointed out
that the IPR WG's updates to RFC 2026 would cause some things in the
review guidelines doc to become obsolete (specifically, the
instructions to copy verbatim the notices in RFC 2026 Section 10)
and would impose new review requirements that were not contained in
the MIB review document.  For those reasons I advocated waiting
until that stuff was finished.  And in fact we really had no other
choice, since the RFC Editor adopted the same policy with respect to
draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis, and the MIB review guidelines
normatively reference that document.

Unfortunately, the relevant IPR documents are still in the RFC
Editor queue;  the status page claims that they are awaiting
revisions by the author:

2003/11/01   draft-ietf-ipr-submission-rights-08.txt
AUTH
S. Bradner, Ed.
IETF Rights in Contributions
Bytes: 46080

2003/11/01   draft-ietf-ipr-technology-rights-12.txt
AUTH
S. Bradner, Ed.
Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology
Bytes: 46296

So the questions is what to do now.  My personal preference would be
just to document current practice, with a note that future changes
to RFC copyright and I-D disclosure rules are anticipated.  However,
that would require that I convince the RFC Editor to do the same with
respect to 2223bis, and somehow I doubt that will happen.  Some more
realistic possibilities that come to mind are:

1.) Issue a new draft that does nothing except update the references
(a) to reflect I-Ds with new version (e.g., replace the pointer to
draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-06.txt with a pointer to to
draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-07.txt) and (b) to reflect the I-Ds that
have since been published as RFCs (that list includes RFCs 3584,
3591, 3593, and 3621).  Then continue to wait for the IPR documents
to be published and for the RFC copyright procedures and I-D
disclosure procedures therein to be put into practice.

2.) Same as above plus add updates that seem to be necessary based
on what has transpired in MIB reviews over the past six months.

3.) Something else that I have not thought of.

Opinions?

//cmh