From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>, "Mreview (E-mail)"
<mreview@ops.ietf.org>
CC: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>, "Nelson, David"
<dnelson@enterasys.com>, "David Kessens (E-mail)"
<david.kessens@nokia.com>
Subject: RE: format of MIB review comments
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 20:51:49 +0100
Dan, I basically support you in this.
RADEXT chairs, what is your reaction to this?
Bert
-----Original Message-----
From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 19:12
To: Mreview (E-mail); Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
Cc: Bernard Aboba; Nelson, David
Subject: format of MIB review comments
Some Working Groups are requiring that comments be submitted following
specific tools, or in a given format. One such example is the RADEXT
Working Group the format is described at
<http://www.drizzle.com/~aboba/RADEXT/>
http://www.drizzle.com/~aboba/RADEXT/
I believe that it should be made clear that MIB quality reviews performed
at the request of the Area Director are not subject to such restrictions. I
understand their rationale, I know that it makes the life easier for the
editors and WG chair, but this cannot be done at the expense of a
considerable supplementary typing effort from the part of the reviewers. I
have already spent a few hours reviewing the RADEXT MIBs, I will probably
need to spend a few more on the technical aspects of the review, but I do
not intent to spend even more time in typing mostly redundant information
for each of the tens of issues and comments that I am submitting.
Regards,
Dan