I know there are some folks in the PWG who really believe a standard
is only "real" if it is Draft (or higher) and is on track for full
IESG adoption.
Given the fact that the printer industry seems to have fully embraced
RFC 1759 as a Proposed standard (evidenced by the many products that
have been offered in the marketplace), does anyone really believe the
same won't be true of this new Printer MIB version?
I'm hoping that as long as we CLOSE the development of this round of
the Printer MIB (ie, no more changes!), then the printer industry
will use this new standard (having a new RFC number) as the current
benchmark for product development.
Does anyone out there disagree with this position and its assumptions?
...jay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- JK Martin | Email: jkm@underscore.com --
-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
-- Hudson, NH 03051-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
lpyoung@lexmark.com wrote:
>
> I wanted to update you on the status of the Printer MIB. As you
> probably remember we cannot advance the Printer MIB to Draft
> Standard until the Host Resources MIB is advanced to Draft Standard.
> A chairman for a Host Resources MIB working group has been
> appointed but has been involved in SNMPv3 and has not been able
> to get the HR MIB working group going yet. He was supposed to free
> up from SNMPv3 during the month of October and subsequently start
> the HR MIB work. Chris and I have drafted our formal request to our
> Area Directors asking that the Printer MIB be considered for
> Draft Standard. Currently we have not sent the formal request
> because we are tidying up the supporting material required to
> progress the MIB forward. I do not have a firm schedule for when
> the new MIB might be moved forward due to our dependency on
> the HR MIB. If things progress as desired, we might be well on
> our way to Draft status by the end of 1997.
>
> I want to ask the working group one more time do we really want
> to move this MIB forward to a Draft Standard. On the current path,
> we are delaying getting products to market that might incorporate
> the changes in the latest Printer MIB in order to achieve the
> Draft Standard status. We could get the updated Printer MIB to
> Proposed Standard much faster than to Draft Standard. It is a
> simple trade-off of time to market versus the prestige of being
> a Draft Standard. I am not convinced that the prestige of being
> a Draft Standard is all that great. I wanted to hear opinions from
> the rest of the working group.
> Regards,
> Lloyd
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Lloyd Young Lexmark International, Inc.
> Senior Program Manager Dept. C14L/Bldg. 035-3
> Strategic Alliances 740 New Circle Road NW
> internet: lpyoung@lexmark.com Lexington, KY 40550
> Phone: (606) 232-5150 Fax: (606) 232-6740