RE: To meet or not to meet?

"Faye Ly" <[email protected]> Mon, 19 Jul 2004 10:32:31 -0700
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.entmib
Message-ID <93401232EABAAB4EA430E13ECC701CCF63ACA9@yorktown.pedestalnetworks.com>
I concur.  I think we should move this MIB forward or get it done. -faye

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:10 AM
To: Margaret Wasserman; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet?


Margaret,

I do not have a strong objection to Entity MIB WG not meeting in San
Diego.

I would like however to see the 'Entity MIB Extensions for manufacturing
date and physical module identification' a.k.a 'Kaj's draft' being
continued and worked out as a standards track document. What are the
reasons that you are not prepared to take this charter item, which seems
to have received a fair amount of interest? I believe this is relative
small amount of work, and possibly Kaj can complete it in one or two
rounds if we do not philosophize too much around it. I volunteered to be
a reviewer. There may be no need for meetings. 

Regards,

Dan



> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Margaret Wasserman
> Sent: 19 July, 2004 7:10 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi again,
> 
> Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB
> meeting for San Diego.  If you have any strong objection to this 
> decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today.
> 
> We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the
> IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a 
> face-to-face meeting.
> 
> I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed
> and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not 
> prepared to take on new charter items at this time.  Folks who want 
> to work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how 
> to move it forward.  Perhaps an individual submission would make the 
> most sense given that it is a short/simple MIB?
> 
> Margaret
> 
> 
> At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> >Hi All,
> >
> >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in
> >San Diego.  Thoughts?
> >
> >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items?
> >
> >Margaret
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Entmib mailing list
> >[email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Entmib mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib
> 

_______________________________________________
Entmib mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib