RE: Entity State MIB Status - DateAndTime Erratum

Why don't you send me the exact text for the erratum and I will 
feel the waters with IESG. 

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: vrijdag 23 juli 2004 14:00
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Cc: Randy Presuhn; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status - DateAndTime Erratum
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 11:45:33AM +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> 
> > I can agree with the erratum submission.
> 
> > However, this is not something we should just decide on the 
> EntMIB mailing
> > list or WG. It is wider. And it does change the spec. So 
> I'd like to at
> > least have IESG approval. The risk is that they may suggest 
> a 4 week IETF
> > Last Call to make sure we have IETF consensus. After all it 
> is a change
> > (in my view a well justified, accaptable, and apparently 
> used in practice)
> > to a full STD document.
> 
> So tell me what the procedure is to make it happen and then I 
> will make
> up a calculation how much of my time it will cost and then I 
> will decide
> whether I engage in this or just let things continue the way they are.
> 
> [It the costs of getting this erratum in place is close to publishing
>  an RFC on this subject, then I might conclude that other things are 
>  more important.]
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 
> 28725 Bremen, Germany
>