Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright

The MIB templates should be updated to match the updated copyright as
well.
I think should also be done in OPSAWG.

dbh 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:18 AM
> To: C. M. Heard; David B Harrington
> Cc: MIB Doctors (E-mail); OPS Area (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] [OPS-AREA] FW: IESG Statement on
Copyright
> 
> I think that we should consider also the following: 
> 
> 1. Update the tools information. We refer now
> http://www.ops.ietf.org/mib-review-tools.html but is the information
> there accurate, with smicng support aparently discontinued? 
> 
> 2. information about templates - refer to RFC 5249 ? 
> 
> Also - is it time to move this discussion to OPSAWG? 
> 
> Dan
> (speaking as contributor)
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected] 
> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of C. M. Heard
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 7:27 PM
> > To: David B Harrington
> > Cc: 'MIB Doctors (E-mail)'; 'OPS Area (E-mail)'
> > Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] [OPS-AREA] FW: IESG Statement on 
> Copyright
> > 
> > +1 also (though I really don't have a stake in the outcome).
> > 
> > One of the things that should probably be discussed is 
> > whether the issues brought up in the attached e-mail 
> > (downgrading some of the MUSTSs to SHOULDs) should be 
> > addressed under the head of bug fixes.
> > 
> > //cmh
> > 
> > On Wed, 23 Sep 2009, David B Harrington wrote:
> > > +1
> > > dbh
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: [email protected]
> > > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Juergen 
> > > > Schoenwaelder
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 5:22 AM
> > > > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> > > > Cc: C. M. Heard; MIB Doctors (E-mail); OPS Area (E-mail)
> > > > Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] [OPS-AREA] FW: IESG Statement on 
> > > > Copyright
> > > > 
> > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:14:46AM +0200, Romascanu, Dan 
> > (Dan) wrote:
> > > > > I have some good news to share. Randy Presuhn stepped 
> ahead and 
> > > > > accepted to be the editor of 4181bis. Thanks, Randy!
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have two questions: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 1. OPSAWG (which did not exist by the time 4181 was edited
and
> > > > > published) seems to me to be the natural home for 
> > 4181bis.  Does 
> > > > > anybody see any problem with this? If all agree we shall
move 
> > > > > discussions to [email protected]
> > > > > 
> > > > > 2.  What should be the scope of 4181bis? 
> > > > 
> > > > Bug fixes and alignment to current IETF procedures and rules 
> > > > (although the last thing might be an endless 
> undertaking ;-). As 
> > > > little rewrite as possible if you ask me.
> > > > 
> > > > /js
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > > > Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 
> > Bremen, Germany
> > > > Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         
> <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
>