[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Time commitments for MIB review
> From: "Harrie Hazewinkel" <email@example.com>
> To: "Mreview (E-mail)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: "Harrington, David" <email@example.com>; "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 1:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Time commitments for MIB review
> I beleive a MIB advisor can serve longer, but a final review must then
> still be done by a different MIB doctor. Just to make sure that things
> do not slip in over time.
In general, if a document requires multiple review cycles, I think
it is helpful to have different reviewers. It's harder (at least for me)
to spot problems when re-reading a document for the third or fourth
time. There needs to be some coordination between reviewers, but
there's nothing like a fresh pair of eyes to spot unfounded assumptions
in a MIB design.