[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ipng
Subject:    Re: Cleaning up the state of IPv6 MIBs
From:       "C. M. Heard" <heard () pobox ! com>
Date:       2015-06-03 19:40:51
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.1506031237540.21949 () shell4 ! bayarea ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, 3 Jun 2015, Bill Fenner wrote:
> I'm fine with changing section 7 to something that would remain (I wrote it
> that way because I thought that we would have a companion document for the
> reclassification, but I realized later that procedure is to be used when
> you *don't* have another document to use).  However, are you sure it'd be
> useful for this document to be referred to in the RFC index for the
> historic RFCs?  It seems like it'd just add a level of indirection, since
> this document says "go see the other RFC4xxx documents".

I think it would be useful, since it would allow the metadata to say or imply 
"go see RFCxxxx for the current version of these MIB modules."

//cmh

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]