Re: Updating the MIB boilerplate

[Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>]

>>>>> On Mon, 4 Nov 2002 12:10:12 +0100 , "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com> said:

Bert> Ok, to be more precise, how about a boilerplate as below.  I
Bert> know that in some cases ref 2579 and 2580 are stricly speaking
Bert> kist informative. But to not complicate matters to much, it
Bert> doesn't harm to include them always in the normative set I
Bert> think.

Looks like a good, short, concise boiler-plate.  I agree we should
shorten it.

However, I do have one misgivings about it: If I were picking it up
from the viewpoint of someone who didn't know about SNMP and MIBs at
all [probably because it was a WG document for some other group], it's
likely that I would not quite get the point that a MIB was tied to a
protocol which can access it.  IE, I'd insert a line just before "This
memo specifies" that says something like "MIBs are generally accessed
through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)".

(yes I know that the first paragraph specifies the 2570 document, but
I think it's important to mention the protocol directly in the text
without having to visit the other document)

-- 
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will
 insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."   -- Terry Pratchett