[Bridge-mib] Charter discussion

"Harrington, David" <dbh@enterasys.com> Thu, 29 April 2004 16:41 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA13167 for <bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 12:41:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BJETH-0002tR-6D for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 12:33:11 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i3TGXB9R011122 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 12:33:11 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BJE20-0000nk-NG; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 12:05:00 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BJDpt-0005rp-IA for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:52:29 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA10451 for <bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:52:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BJDpo-0005fx-Se for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:52:24 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BJDos-0005PQ-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:51:26 -0400
Received: from ctron-dnm.enterasys.com ([12.25.1.120] ident=firewall-user) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BJDoD-00059I-00 for Bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:50:45 -0400
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by ctron-dnm.enterasys.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA28978 for <Bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:53:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nhrocavg2(134.141.79.124) by ctron-dnm.enterasys.com via smap (4.1) id xma027644; Thu, 29 Apr 04 11:50:48 -0400
Received: from NHROCCNC2.ets.enterasys.com ([134.141.79.124]) by 134.141.79.124 with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:48:21 -0400
Received: from source ([134.141.79.122]) by host ([134.141.79.124]) with SMTP; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:48:21 -0400
Received: from nhrocmbx1 ([134.141.79.104]) by NHROCCNC2.ets.enterasys.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:48:06 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:47:48 -0400
Message-ID: <6D745637A7E0F94DA070743C55CDA9BA0197747D@NHROCMBX1.ets.enterasys.com>
Thread-Topic: Charter discussion
Thread-Index: AcQuAVJX88UjMWW3RkuQDV5k4BuxEA==
From: "Harrington, David" <dbh@enterasys.com>
To: <Bridge-mib@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Apr 2004 15:48:06.0452 (UTC) FILETIME=[5D11F740:01C42E01]
X-pstn-version: pmps:sps_win32_1_1_0c1 pase:2.5
X-pstn-levels: (C:93.2377 M:97.3254 P:95.9108 R:95.9108 S:28.5576 )
X-pstn-settings: 4 (0.2500:0.2500) p:13 m:13 c:14 r:13
X-pstn-addresses: from <dbh@enterasys.com> forward (org good)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [Bridge-mib] Charter discussion
Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <bridge-mib.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:bridge-mib@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hmmm. Quiet.

We've asked for comments on the charter and asked for document review
prior to WG last call, and have gotten about three responses to each
request.

Since there appears to be a high degree of apathy in this group, and
there is a real lack of editors available, I'd like to consider ways to
reduce the workload yet to be accomplished.

I suggest
1) eliminating the 802.1x mib from the charter. The IEEE has already
published one, and ours is just a duplicate. I believe ours is now out
of sync with the updated 802.1x work as well.
2) eliminating the SMIv2 update for RFC1493. A MIB document has three
general use cases - implementation, application import, and
documentation for human consumption. Most implementors have already
implemented against RFC1493. Most applications can import the SMIv1
version without any significant problems. Humans can read the SMIv1
version as easily as they can read the SMIv2 version. 
	So we don't really need an SMIv2 version, unless we want to
advance RFC1493 in the standards track, but I don't see the commercial
benefit to doing this, and companies spoonsoring editors probably won't
see a return for their sponsorship.
	There are a few updates done to the descriptions to match IEEE
updates to their management. If the IEEE thinks the update is important,
then they can take our document and finalize it.

That would leave us with just two documents to complete instead of four.
If we cannot get adequate reviews for these two documents, then I'll
suggest discarding these documents as well, and closing the WG.

Comments?

David Harrington            
dbh@enterasys.com
Director, Network Management Architecture
Office of the CTO, Enterasys Networks


_______________________________________________
Bridge-mib mailing list
Bridge-mib@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib