RE: Entity State MIB Next Steps
Margaret Wasserman <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.entmib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Sharon, >My vote is for 1), except if the current update resolves issues from the >previous working group last call do we need a second? There was substantial >rewrite, but no objects were changed. I could go either way. I realize that the objects haven't change, but enough of the text has changed that I would like to have another WG Last Call before sending it to the IESG, just to make sure that the new text has been well-reviewed. >I'm hoping that the more concise text in the latest version appeases the >concern that what the working group has come up with is too complicated. I just finished reading the new version, and I think that it is much simpler and clearer. Thanks! I would be happy to see us publish the Entity State MIB in its current form. What do others think? Margaret