Re: Last Call: DNS Server MIB Extensions to Historic
Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@eng.sun.com> Tue, 27 March 2001 01:22 UTC
Received: from psg.com (exim@psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id UAA23843 for <dnsext-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 20:22:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lserv by psg.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14hhuP-000Bp2-00 for namedroppers-data@psg.com; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 17:04:29 -0800
Received: from rip.psg.com ([147.28.0.39] ident=exim) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14hhuP-000Bow-00 for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 17:04:29 -0800
Received: from randy by rip.psg.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14hhuP-00056J-00 for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 17:04:29 -0800
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 16:10:33 -0800
From: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@eng.sun.com>
Reply-To: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@eng.sun.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: DNS Server MIB Extensions to Historic
To: Jon Saperia <saperia@jdscons.com>
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
In-Reply-To: "Your message with ID" <Roam.SIMC.2.0.6.985651479.19420.nordmark@bebop.france>
Message-ID: <Roam.SIMC.2.0.6.985651833.28933.nordmark@bebop.france>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
[Resent with correct addresses] >----------------Begin Forwarded Message----------------< Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 16:04:39 -0800 (PST) From: "Erik Nordmark" <Erik.Nordmark@eng.sun.com> Subject: Re: Last Call: DNS Server MIB Extensions to Historic To: "Jon Saperia" <saperia@jdscons.com> Cc: iesg@ietf.org, namedroppers@nic.ddn.mil.cnri.reston.va > > > > > The IESG has received a request to consider reclassifying the following > > RFCs as Historic: > > > > RFC1611 'DNS Server MIB Extensions' > > RFC1612 'DNS Resolver MIB Extensions' > > > > The IESG will also consider publication of Applicability Statement for > > DNS MIB Extensions <draft-ietf-dnsext-dnsmib-historical-00.txt> as an > > Informational RFC. > > > > draft-ietf-dnsext-dnsmib-historical-00.txt, needs revision to be a > useful document. While I do not support the move of 1611 and 1612 to > historic and would rather that the documents be revised in light of > current requirements, I am happy to work with Rob to revise the proposed > document that explains the change in status. Jon, Can you provide some more detail on what you believe is wrong in the current I-D? It was clear from the rough concensus in dnsext that the WG doesn't want to fix 1611 and 1612 but instead invites others to go off and form design team(s) to come up with relatively complete proposals for replacement MIBs. Thanks, Erik >----------------End Forwarded Message----------------< to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
- Re: Last Call: DNS Server MIB Extensions to Histo… Erik Nordmark
- Re: Last Call: DNS Server MIB Extensions to Histo… Jon Saperia