Call for consensus: where to root MIB modules

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

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, C. M. Heard wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> > 15. Mike, you suggest to always assign directly under mib-2 and no longer
> >     allow (maybe I say it too strong now) to have things like rmon and mpls
> >     subtrees that we ask IANA to administer.  I know we had a discussion
> >     about this. May I assume that you read consensus under the MIB doctors
> >     for the text that you now have (Sect 4.5 3rd bullet)?
> 
> I'll put out a call on a separate thread.

This is a call for consensus (or lack thereof) on the following change:

Add to the following paragraph the sentence at the end of Section 4.5:

   - The value assigned to the MODULE-IDENTITY descriptor MUST be unique
     and (for IETF standards-track MIB modules) SHOULD reside under the
     mgmt subtree [RFC2578].  Most often it will be an IANA-assigned
     value directly under mib-2 [RFC2578], although for media-specific
     MIB modules that extend the IF-MIB [RFC2863] it is customary to use
     an IANA-assigned value under transmission [RFC2578].  In the past
     some IETF working groups have made their own assignments from
     subtrees delegated to them by IANA, but that practice has proven
+    problematic and is NOT RECOMMENDED.  Also NOT RECOMMENDED is the
+    practice of setting up another subtree under mib-2 or tranmsission
+    for the IANA to administer, because it offers no technical
+    advantage to compensate for the increased administrative workload.

Please state whether you suppose this proposed change.  In the absence of
significant positive response I shall assume that there is no consensus
to make this change and I will take it out.

Mike