Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Fix of Security Guidelines for IETF MIB Modules

[Glenn Mansfield Keeni <[e-mail]>]

Hi,
 > I propose we fix this nit now, and the larger discussion can
 > continue - 'tis trivial to update the boilerplate again once
 > the larger discussion has gelled.
 >
 > Sound reasonable? I'll let Ignas to make the call (it's more
 > on his side of the house than mine).

Absolutely! Thanks.

Glenn

On 2018/10/01 3:33, Warren Kumari wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 2:53 AM Glenn Mansfield Keeni <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> 
>> Warren,Ignas,
>>          Hi. The Security Guidelines for IETF MIB Modules
>> needs a fix in the text that is generally used verbatim
>> in MIB documents.
>> The proposed fix is
>>
>> OLD: Some of the readable objects in this MIB module
>>        (i.e., objects with a MAX-ACCESS other than
>>         not-accessible)
>> NEW: Some of the readable objects in this MIB module
>>        (e.g., objects with a MAX-ACCESS other than
>>         not-accessible)
>>
>> The above is a significant nit. It appears in the
>> Security Considerations sections section of every
>> MIB document.
>>
>> There has been some discussion on the IETF MIB-DOCTORS
>> mailing list on this matter. There is no disagreement
>> on the proposed fix.
>>
>> Please advise on how to proceed on this matter.
>>
> 
> I'm obviously not Igans (he's got more, and better hair), but this is
> clearly a nit that is easy to address.
> I propose we fix this nit now, and the larger discussion can continue -
> 'tis trivial to update the boilerplate again once the larger discussion has
> gelled.
> 
> Sound reasonable? I'll let Ignas to make the call (it's more on his side of
> the house than mine).
> 
> W
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Glenn
>>
>>
>