RE: Milestones Update

Are not we too much in a hurry with requiring implementation reports for the Entity Sensor MIB, only three months after the publication of RFC 3433? According to Section 6.2 of RFC 2026 a Proposed Standard needs to remain at least six months at Proposed. There is certainly nothing bad in trying to gather information for advancement earlier, but do we have reasons to believe that at least two implementations will already be available that fast?

Dan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 10:07 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Bert Wijnen; [email protected]; Margaret Wasserman
> Subject: RE: [Entmib] Milestones Update
> 
> 
> Approved by AD
> 
> Thanks,
> Bert 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: donderdag 19 december 2002 20:11
> > To: [email protected]
> > Cc: Bert Wijnen; [email protected]
> > Subject: Fwd: [Entmib] Milestones Update
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Please update the Entity MIB (entmib) WG milestones to match 
> > the attached
> > list.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Margaret
> > 
> > P.S.  Merry Christmas, Bert!  :-)
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Done    Post Internet-Draft for Entity MIB.
> > Done    Post updated Entity MIB Internet-Draft.
> > Done    Submit final version of Internet-Draft for 
> consideration as a 
> > Proposed Standard.
> > Done    Finalize scope of changes/augmentations to RFC 2037
> > Done    Post updated/new Internet Drafts
> > Done    Reach agreement on changes/extensions to RFC 2037
> > Done    Evaluate status of RFC 2037 and report to the IESG if 
> > it should be 
> > recycled at 	   Proposed or can be elevated to Draft 
> Standard.
> > Done    Submit Internet Draft containing Entity MIB 
> > Extensions to IESG for 
> > consideration
> >            as a Proposed Standard.
> > Done    Evaluate status of Entity MIB and collect 
> implementation and 
> > interoperability
> >            reports
> > Done    Recommend to the IESG if Entity MIB can be elevated 
> > to Draft Standard.
> > Done    Post Internet-Draft for Sensor Entity MIB
> > Done    Determine if the Entity MIB should be modified to 
> > resolve any open 
> > issues
> > Done    Submit final version of Internet-Draft for Sensor 
> > Entity MIB for 
> > consideration
> >            as a Proposed Standard
> > JAN 02  Publish state/status extensions as a WG I-D
> > MAR 03  Submit state/status extensions to the IESG for 
> > Proposed Standard
> > MAR 03  Evaluate status of the Entity MIB and collect 
> > implementation and
> >            interoperability reports
> > MAR 03  Evaluate status of the Sensor Entity MIB and collect 
> > implementation and
> >            interoperability reports
> > MAY 03  Submit the Entity MIB to the IESG for Draft Standard.
> > MAY 03  Submit the Sensor Entity MIB to the IESG for Draft Standard
> > JUN 03  Re-charter or shut-down the WG
> > 
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Entmib mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib
>