Hi Juergen,
I handled the IANA allocation for the snmpconf WG, and it took four months for IANA to assign the numbers. Had we gotten the branch sooner, we could have avoided having I-Ds published using the mib-2 or experimental branches with made up numbers. Had we been assigned a WG ID to start, we would have avoided the problem altogether.
You can view my suggestion as over-engineering; I view it as trying to solve the root problem, which is partly that people must use unassigned OIDs because they can't get OID assignments on a timely basis.
my $.02
dbh
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:15 AM
> To: Harrington, David
> Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: MIB module numbering for TBD MIB roots
>
>
>
> >>>>> Harrington, David writes:
>
> Dave> Maybe the simplest approach would be to have IANA assign the
> Dave> equivalent of an enterprise ID to each working group, that is
> Dave> expected to produce a mib module, when the working group is
> Dave> created. How WGs manage the numbers under their ID is their
> Dave> decision, just as enterprises control how numbers are assigned
> Dave> within an enterprise branch.
>
> You can do that with the experimental tree for years now but people
> usually don't care about doing it. Even if you automate the IANA
> allocation with WG approval, I am sure that only half of the WGs that
> do MIBs will use it. Something really simple like { mib-2 xxx } or {
> mib-2 0 } is IMHO sufficient. Lets not over-engineer a solution for
> this problem.
>
> /js
>