Re: Normative References in draft-ietf-midcom-mib-09

That seems reaasonable to me.

Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> After some more discussion there may be another way that actually is 
> better. As the MIB is do dependent on the semantics the proposal would 
> be to retarget RFC 3989 to proposed standard. Then we keep that as 
> normative reference. The other two (RFC 3303, RFC 3404) both are moved 
> to informational part of the reference list. Any comments on this?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Magnus Westerlund
> 
> Magnus Westerlund skrev:
>> Hi
>>
>> In the IESG evaluation of the document it was realized that there was 
>> three normative references (RFC 3303, RFC 3404, RFC 3989) that are to 
>> informative documents. These are not allowed unless it can be accepted 
>> under RFC3967.
>>
>> I have discussed this with the authors and from our point of view RFC 
>> 3304 can be changed informative reference, it is not required for 
>> implementing the protocol. However RFC 3989 is clearly required to be 
>> implemented and that it seems that also RFC 3303 can be consider to be 
>> a normative reference. Is anyone in the WG disagreeing about this 
>> classification?
>>
>> If the WG is agreeing on a classification that contains any 
>> informational RFCs in the normative section the document will require 
>> a new IETF last call that calls out these downrefs.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Magnus Westerlund
>>
>> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVA/A
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
>> Torshamsgatan 23           | Fax   +46 8 7575550
>> S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email protected]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> midcom mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom
> 
>