Subject: Re: JMP> Re: Charter Update Request (fwd)

From: JK Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 16:48:36 -0400 (EDT)

Funny, but I thought the Job Monitoring MIB effort was officially
sanctioned as part of the printmib WG as of the San Jose IETF meetings
last December.  (Or rather, shortly after those meetings, as a result
of the Job MIB BOF.)

Has something changed?  Or do I (and others) misunderstand this situation?

	...jay

----- Begin Included Message -----

>From [email-masked] Thu May 29 16:19 EDT 1997
X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/
From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
To: Tom Hastings <[email-masked]>
cc: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked],
        Chris Wellens <[email-masked]>, Lloyd Young <[email-masked]>,
        [email-masked], [email-masked], Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: JMP> Re: Charter Update Request (fwd) 
Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 16:16:59 -0400

> What other lists do you suggest sending the Job Monitoring MIB to
> in order to get comments before LAST CALL?
> 
> I'd be glad to do that.
> 
> Also who determines "LAST CALL" for comments?  How is that done and to
> whom?  I'm not familiar with that step.

Since JOB MIB isn't part of printmib's charter, this will be
handled as an individual submission, and can be submitted at
any time the authors feel that the document is ready.

To submit the draft, follow the procedure listed in
http://www.apps.ietf.org/apps/procedures.html
under the heading "Standards without a WG"
(which in turm references the section "Standards from a WG")

Strictly speaking, the submission should come from the document
authors.  (IESG may refer the document to a working group -- 
say, the printmib working group -- for review, in which case the
chair of that group should determine whether that group has any
objections to the proposal... though if there's already a clear
indication of concensus on the printmib mailing list, we won't 
bother with the actual referral...)

As for where else to get comments, I'd certainly recommend having
SNMP experts look it over for soundness (if it hasn't been done
already), and you could send it to the APPS directorate at 
[email-masked].

You might also ask the O&M area directors, since they handle
most SNMP-related stuff.

Keith

----- End Included Message -----

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 17:45:46 -0400

> Has something changed?  Or do I (and others) misunderstand this situation?

I don't have any record of that charter change being approved;
for whatever reason, it never made it to the IETF web pages.
Naturally, if the charter change really was formally approved by 
the area director, IETF should honor it.  I'll ask the IETF 
secretariat to look through its records.

However, I wouldn't let this hold up the job mib.  If or when it's 
ready to go, go ahead and send it in.  The approval process isn't
that different, and once the document is approved there is no
distinction between an individual submission and one produced by
a working group.

Keith