Re: Consensus? RFC1628 to Historic

[[e-mail] (Maria Greene)]

Thanks, Bob and Harald, for explaining the procedure. Yes, there is
work to do if we want the RFC to advance and my sense is that there's
noone willing to help with it. Correct me if I'm wrong by
volunteering. A change to Historic will not make the MIB less useful
(or make any referencing documents less correct) and I doubt many
customers check the standards process status when evaluating products.

Maria

>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:

    Bob> At 08:58 AM 7/30/98 -0700, C. Adam Stolinski wrote:
    >> I had no idea that the IETF had become another "Alice in
    >> Wonderland" spec group!

    Bob> Alice in Wonderland or not you don't appear to be aware of
    Bob> either the IETF standards process or the reasons behind it.

    >> Is it about standards for implementation - or about busying
    >> ourselves with "workgroups"???

    Bob> It's about practical, working standards.

    >> RFC 1628 works, is implemented by the entire UPS industry, and
    >> nobody feels that it needs any changes.  So, the IETF position
    >> is lets make it obsolete, because there is no activity in the
    >> WG?????

    Bob> No, it's because there's no way to tell a standard that
    Bob> nobody cares about from one that's good unless the people who
    Bob> implement it take the time to say so.

    >> There is a difference between "work" and "makework".

    Bob> Most of the people I know who are involved in Internet
    Bob> standards have more work than they can already handle.
    Bob> They're unlikely to make work just so they can apppear busy.

    >> "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

    Bob> If you can't tell whether it's a viable standard, don't leave
    Bob> the illusion that it is.

    Bob> The work involved falls mostly on the working group chair,
    Bob> collecting implementation reports and writing a
    Bob> recommendation for advancement to Draft Standard, then
    Bob> repeating the effort to promote to full Internet Standard.

    Bob> The maxim you suggest should be invoked when people start
    Bob> suggesting significant changes to the standard itself.

    Bob> 	Bob