RE: rfc1643 to historic
"Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.hubmib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <F74EF3316D9CD4118D8400508BAEDCAA07616261@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> |
OK, will do them together I was asking, cause we could approve it now in IESG. It would then go to RFC-Editor queue and then stay there till all normative references also show up. Thanks, Bert > -----Original Message----- > From: C. M. Heard [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: maandag 18 november 2002 18:32 > To: Hubmib Mailing List (E-mail) > Subject: Re: rfc1643 to historic > > > On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > > > I am OK with this document. > > Does the WG want me to hold this till we also have the other > > 3 documents ready or shall I go ahead and put this one on IESG > > agenda now? > > This document includes 2665bis (EtherLike-MIB) and 2668bis (MAU-MIB) > in the normative reference list -- > > [RFCxxxx] Flick, J., "Definitions of Managed Objects for > the Ethernet- > like Interface Types", <draft-ietf-hubmib-etherif-mib- > v3-02.txt>, work in progress. > > [RFCyyyy] Flick, J., "Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 > Medium Attachment Units (MAUs)", > <draft-ietf-hubmib-mau-mib- > v3-02.txt>, work in progress. > > and so cannot be published until those documents are also published. > I therefore suggest that 2665bis, 2668bis, and this document be put > on the IESG agenda at the same time. Note that there is no need to > wait for the WIS MIB document, though, because 1643-to-historic does > not reference it in any way. > > > Mike >