RE: Status of the WG

Thanks David, this is good to note... Do you believe this WG has
sufficiently captured all the maintenance fixes in the objective
document (ignoring all the syntactic "enhancements" also listed there)?
Agreeing on the appropriate subset of objectives is the first step (ie.
support for Int64).

Again, I am interested in identifying contributors, authors & editors.
Clearly our previous attempts have proven too ambitious (or provided
insufficient value for the investment required), so who is now
interested in completing the less ambitious SMI maintenance drafts?

-Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David T. Perkins [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 11:09 AM
> To: Durham, David; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Sming (E-mail)
> Cc: Randy Bush (E-mail)
> Subject: 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