Re: Benoit Claise's No Objection on charter-ietf-bfd-07-03: (with COMMENT)

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for the clarification Jeff.

Regards, Benoit
> Benoit,
>
> Draft-ietf-bfd-mpls-mib not the base MIB or the TC MIB.
>
> Jeff
>
>> On May 28, 2014, at 16:26, Benoit Claise <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jeff,
>>
>> I'm confused.
>> I thought that this entry was related to the two BFD mib modules on tomorrow IESG telechat? So very close to go the RFC editor queue AFAICT
>> Or maybe, you're thinking of something else with this "MPLS MIB"?
>>
>> Regards, B.
>>> Benoit,
>>>
>>> The MPLS MIB is still a remaining work item.
>>>
>>> At this point we have no further management items but I suspect that S-BFD may eventually produce such work. Whether that is a MIB or a yang module is to be determined.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>> On May 28, 2014, at 14:28, "Benoit Claise" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
>>>> charter-ietf-bfd-07-03: No Objection
>>>>
>>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>>>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-bfd/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> COMMENT:
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully, you can now remove:
>>>>    1. Develop the MIB modules for BFD and submit them to the IESG for
>>>>    publication as Proposed Standards.
>>>>
>>>> And the famous milestones are absent.
>>> .
>>>
> .
>