[ietf-outcomes] Suggested corrections to OPS wiki page

"C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com> Sun, 14 February 2010 19:31 UTC

Return-Path: <heard@pobox.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F973A79F0 for <ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:31:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n8+oIekZ+URH for <ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:31:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shell4.bayarea.net (shell4.bayarea.net []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 641073A784E for <ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:31:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 14753 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2010 11:32:28 -0800
Received: from shell4.bayarea.net ( by shell4.bayarea.net with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 14 Feb 2010 11:32:27 -0800
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:32:27 -0800 (PST)
From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
X-X-Sender: heard@shell4.bayarea.net
To: IETF Outcomes <ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1002141115190.6399@shell4.bayarea.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: [ietf-outcomes] Suggested corrections to OPS wiki page
X-BeenThere: ietf-outcomes@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Outcomes Wiki discussion list <ietf-outcomes.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-outcomes>, <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-outcomes>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-outcomes>, <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:31:02 -0000


The first column of the following


describes SMIv1.  In order for this to reflect the SMIv1 that was 
widely adopted and practiced (and the one listed under STD0016 and 
in our older MIB boilerplate), the RFCs column should show 1155, 
1212, and 1215, and the "Date Issued" should show 1991.  Also, the 
"Years to Develop" should be bumped from 2 to 3 (noting that RFC 
1065 was published in 1988, that may understate the development 
time, but I don't know enough of the history to be sure).

Also, would it be appropriate to show the '>' symbol ("prompted 
extensive derivative work") for both SMIv1 and SNMPv1, since these 
led directly to SMIv2 and SNMPv3 respectively?

Mike Heard