Re: Compliance definitions, where will they be?

Frank Kastenholz <kasten@ftp.com> Wed, 04 November 1992 13:49 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01947; 4 Nov 92 8:49 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01943; 4 Nov 92 8:49 EST
Received: from thumper.bellcore.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06279; 4 Nov 92 8:50 EST
Received: by thumper.bellcore.com (4.1/4.7) id <AA27275> for ietf-archive@nri.reston.va.us; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:50:29 EST
Received: from ftp.com (babyoil.ftp.com) by thumper.bellcore.com (4.1/4.7) id <AA27164> for /usr/lib/sendmail -oi -fowner-snmp2 X-snmp2; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:50:27 EST
Received: by ftp.com id AA02509; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:49:48 -0500
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:49:48 -0500
Message-Id: <9211041349.AA02509@ftp.com>
To: snmp2@thumper.bellcore.com
Subject: Re: Compliance definitions, where will they be?
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Frank Kastenholz <kasten@ftp.com>
Reply-To: kasten@ftp.com
Cc: mlk%bir.UUCP@mathcs.emory.edu, snmp2@thumper.bellcore.com


 > > Is it intended that compliance definitions be in the RFC defining the
 > > mib module, or will a seperate RFC (continually updated) be created
 > > that contains all the compliance definitions for the Internet?
 > > 
 > > I realize either could happen.  What did you guys plan on?
 > 
 > It depends on the circumstances.  I would expect that future HR and RR
 > documents would define several such definitions.

in fact the rr draft that is in an id directory near you does this...

--
Frank Kastenholz