RE: Status of the WG

HI,

It has been "out of scope" to perform "maintenance fixes" on the SMI.
There are several people who are interested in this activity. So, I
believe that your message below is not quite correct.

At 09:39 AM 2/13/2003 -0800, Durham, David wrote:
>The silence is deafening, and says it all. It seems that while most are
>in agreement that SMI is seriously antiquated, convoluted, and requires
>several maintenance fixes, there is very little (apparently zero now)
>interest in fixing it and improving it. It would seem people are
>satisfied with SNMP being regulated to a legacy systems management
>interface. 
>
>There is the realization that up-to-date data modeling languages are
>already widely used and available (e.g. XMLSchema), and that the IETF
>should not be engaged in the task of inventing yet another idiosyncratic
>data modeling language... Particularly given that it will seriously
>languish behind those that are commonly available today. 
>
>Looking at the ROI on this effort, there are those who are asking why
>not just adopt what is already available and stop beating a dead horse
>in the hopes it will rise.
>
>-Dave
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:[email protected]]
>> 
>> So... not much (if anything) seems to be happening.
>> 
Regards,
/david t. perkins