RE: [newtrk] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-00.txt

["Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <dromasca@avaya.com>]

RFC 1525 is in discussions to be made Historical. 

Dan



 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 2:15 AM
> To: Mreview (E-mail)
> Subject: FW: [newtrk] I-D 
> ACTION:draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-00.txt
> 
> MIB doctors, I am not sure if you are all on the ietfmibs 
> mailing list. Probably you are, but just to be sure you all see this.
> 
> Mike, thanks for summarizing the impact on MIB modules.
> 
> Bert
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ietfmibs@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-ietfmibs@ops.ietf.org]On
> Behalf Of C. M. Heard
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 18:16
> To: Mibs Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [newtrk] I-D
> ACTION:draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-00.txt
> 
> 
> Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
> > directories. This draft is a work item of the New IETF 
> Standards Track 
> > Discussion Working Group of the IETF.
> >
> >       Title           : Getting rid of the cruft: an 
> experiment to identify
> >                         obsolete standards document
> >       Author(s)       : E. Lear, H. Alvestrand
> >       Filename        : draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-00.txt
> >       Pages           : 11
> >       Date            : 2005-9-13
> >
> >    This memo documents an experiment to review and classify Proposed
> >    Standards as not reflecting documented practice within the world
> >    today.  The results identify three classes of documents marked as
> >    Proposed Standards that should be considered for 
> retirement in some
> >    way or another.
> >
> > A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> > 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experime
> > nt-00.txt
> 
> MIB folks --
> 
> FYI, among the documents that the above draft proposes to 
> move to HISTORIC are the following MIB documents:
> 
>       RFC1285 (FDDI Management Information Base)
>       RFC1381 (SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 LAPB)
>       RFC1382 (SNMP MIB Extension for the X.25 Packet Layer)
>       RFC1414 (Identification MIB)
>       RFC1461 (SNMP MIB extension for Multiprotocol Interconnect over
>       X.25)
>       RFC1471 (The Definitions of Managed Objects for the Link Control
>       Protocol of the Point-to-Point Protocol)
>       RFC1472 (The Definitions of Managed Objects for the Security
>       Protocols of the Point-to-Point Protocol)
>       RFC1473 (The Definitions of Managed Objects for the IP Network
>       Control Protocol of the Point-to-Point Protocol)
>       RFC1474 (The Definitions of Managed Objects for the 
> Bridge Network
>       Control Protocol of the Point-to-Point Protocol)
>       RFC1512 (FDDI Management Information Base)
>       RFC1513 (Token Ring Extensions to the Remote Network Monitoring
>       MIB)
>       RFC1525 (Definitions of Managed Objects for Source Routing
>       Bridges)
>       RFC1666 (Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA NAUs 
> using SMIv2)
>       RFC1696 (Modem Management Information Base (MIB) using SMIv2)
>       RFC1742 (AppleTalk Management Information Base II)
>       RFC1747 (Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA Data 
> Link Control
>       (SDLC) using SMIv2)
>       RFC1749 (IEEE 802.5 Station Source Routing MIB using SMIv2)
> 
> If it is believed that such reclassification is inappropriate 
> (e.g., because a MIB module is still in active use), please 
> notify the Newtrk WG and/or the draft authors.
> 
> //cmh
> 
> 
>