Re: SMIng consensus issues restated, call for consensus endsSeptembe r 18, 2002

[Wes Hardaker <wes@hardakers.net>]

>>>>> On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 10:25:28 -0700 , "Durham, David" <david.durham@intel.com> said:

David> I have prepared this message to the mailing list to initiate a
David> last call on the wg consensus for items raised during the IETF
David> and interim meetings. This last call is also for the
David> edification of those on the list who have not read/commented on
David> the meeting minutes.

I'm not sure whether you're asking for "agreement" comments or only
"disagreement" comments, so I'll just respond with agreements anyway:

  Agree on all points.

Notes:

David> 4. The existing smi look-and-feel will be preserved where
David> possible.

emphasis on "where possible", yes.  This was discussed in depth in DC
in June, and I agree completely with the agreements made there (hows
that for a statement?).  The important part is that we fix some of the
current oddities that are broken in the current look-and-feel, like
ensuring that the tag always comes before the data to ease parsers.
With that in mind, "yes, I agree!"

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Network Associates Laboratories