[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SNMP improvements

To: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
Subject: Re: SNMP improvements
From: Harrie Hazewinkel <harrie@lisanza.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:06:38 +0200
Cc: Harrie Hazewinkel <harrie@lisanza.net>, "David T. Perkins" <dperkins@dsperkins.com>, "Harrington, David" <dbh@enterasys.com>, <mibs@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <sdd6dwr08g.fsf@wanderer.hardakers.net>

Hi,

I just thinking, but for some of the improvements people thought
were needed to SNMP existed internet-drafts. Even though the
respective WGs were closed, why not work on them as individual
draft??

When it is beleived they are good enough and there are some
implementations you could ask the IESG for RFC publication.
(It would not be the first individual id that makes it to RFC)
As soon the ideas/proposals are RFC they stay around, as
only internet-draft they fall of the table and no one picks
them up anymore.

Harrie

References:
- Re: SNMP improvements
  - From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>

Prev by Date: Re: SNMP improvements
Next by Date: tunnelMIB (RC2667) implementations and/or deployment
Previous by thread: Re: SNMP improvements
Next by thread: Re: [RMONMIB] What's new with timeFilterMode?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread