RE: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoin ts' to BCP (fwd)

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

Mmmm... the general IANA policy is that the IANA in fact CAN
make asisgnments right after the IESG has approved a document.
So such can in fact happen a few months before the actuial RFC
is published. 

In general, IANA does only assign pretty close before the RFC
get s published (because that is the time when RFC-Editor asks
them to do so). So if someone wants a quick allocation, then
the request for such quick allocation has to be made explicit.

The reason why the RTG area is doing their "special thing" is
because they REQUIRE that RTG related protocols have at least
one (prefereably more) implementations BEFORE they can even
get published as Proposed Std. So therefore they need allocation
BEFORE the IESG has approved. We do not have that situation with
MIB Modules.

So, given the above, do we really need such an early assignment
procedure for MIB documents?

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com]
> Sent: vrijdag 6 augustus 2004 20:11
> To: C. M. Heard; Mreview (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track
> Codepoints' to BCP (fwd)
> 
> 
> I believe that this proposal is useful, but we need to be 
> careful in picking the right timing for an early allocation 
> of the OIDs for MIB modules. The key issue is the backwards 
> compatibility. As long as there are fair chances for the MIB 
> module to go through changes that would impact backwards 
> compatibility, the WG chair or the shepherding AD should not 
> publish values for pre-allocated OIDs. I would say that this 
> moment is not sooner than the IESG approval of the document 
> that includes the MIB module. This would still shorten the 
> process and make the OID values available a few months before 
> publication and lower the chances of later interoperability problems.
> 
> Obviously. I would like a consistent policy to be implemented 
> by all WGs in the IETF that do MIB modules. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org 
> > [mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org]On Behalf Of C. M. Heard
> > Sent: 06 August, 2004 6:40 PM
> > To: Mreview (E-mail)
> > Subject: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track 
> > Codepoints' to BCP (fwd)
> > 
> > 
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > I would like to suggest that all MIB Doctors have a look at
> > 
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kompella-zinin-early
> > -allocation-02.txt
> > 
> > which (as noted in the attached e-mail message) is now in last call.
> > 
> > I guess the questions that I have are whether or not it would be a
> > good idea to adopt an Early Allocation policy for top-level OIDs of
> > new MIB modules, and if such a policy was adopted, at what point
> > such an allocation would make sense to allow such an allocation.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Mike Heard
> > 
> > 
>