IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Consensus? RFC1628 to Historic

Bob Stewart <bstewart@cisco.com> Thu, 30 July 1998 20:38 UTC

Delivery-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:38:08 -0400
Return-Path: owner-ups-mib@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from cnri.reston.va.us (ns [132.151.1.1]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id QAA06386 for <ietf-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:38:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CS.UTK.EDU (CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.1]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id QAA24962 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:37:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA12657; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:22:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from zipper.cisco.com (zipper.cisco.com [171.69.63.31]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA12641; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:22:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tootsie.cisco.com (tootsie.cisco.com [171.69.128.44]) by zipper.cisco.com (8.8.5-Cisco.2-SunOS.5.5.1.sun4/8.6.5) with SMTP id NAA18163; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 13:21:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980730161945.0084b220@zipper.cisco.com>
X-Sender: bstewart@zipper.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:19:45 -0400
To: maria@xedia.com
From: Bob Stewart <bstewart@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Consensus? RFC1628 to Historic
Cc: ups-mib@CS.UTK.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9807301941.AA21618@>
References: <01bdbbd2$e3ec91a0$0d23480c@367140823worldnet.att.net> <3.0.5.32.19980730121542.00835100@zipper.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 03:41 PM 7/30/98 -0400, Maria Greene wrote:
>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.

Good point.  If the UPS community wants an official Internet Standard, they
have to go through the process.  If they're happy with a centrally-located,
common document carrying the cachet of "Internet RFC" then Historic status
is just fine.

You get what you're willing to work for.  "Internet Standard" implies
considerable community cooperation and review, and that takes time and
process, both of which are still less than most standards organizations.

	Bob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email