AgentX WG: New work items or close?

[Frank Fock]

I am forwarding this posting from Bob Natale
on the AgentX mailing list to the AGENT++
list:

Hi folks,

With the advancement of the AgentX specs to
Draft Standard status some time ago, we now
need to decide whether we want to take on any
new work items as an WG or ask the IESG to
close the WG until the time comes to review
the specs' qualifications for Full Standard
status.

The possible work items I know of that we
could incorporate into a revised charter
include:

   - Mechanisms for supporting the SNMPv3
     security features in AgentX...this has
     been discussed on the list in the past
     under the "security credentials" and
     "isAccessAllowed()" threads.

   - Process mechanisms for ensuring that
     IETF standard MIBs are written in such
     a way as to avoid constructs that
     prevent or seriously impede standard
     AgentX support (e.g., avoiding the use
     of scalar objects).  This might take
     the form of a new boilerplate section
     for MIBs called "AgentX Considerations",
     akin to the "Security Considerations"
     section currently required.  For vendor
     MIBs, this process would encourage
     AgentX supportability.

   - Any potential revisions to the specs
     that have surfaced since the implementation
     survey that we did prior to going to
     Draft Standard status that we will need
     to address for Full Standard status...
     might as well air these at the earliest
     possible point and come up with solutions.

   - Any other suggestions from the floor...?

However, we should undertake these new work items
*only* if there is sufficient interest in actually
working on them (writing, editing, reviewing,
commenting, coding, testing, etc.) among a reasonable
subset of the group.  Otherwise, we should ask the
IESG to close the WG.

So, if you are interested in working on any of
the above items in this forum, please post your
comments to the list within the next several days.
I'll aim for summarizing the response by the end
of next week (Fri 4/12) and making a recommendation
to the ADs for their consideration.

I have bcc:'d the "AgentPP" and "NET-SNMP" lists
on this notice since they have more AgentX traffic
than this list -- a good thing at this point! --
but please post all responses back to this list
alias only.

Thanks,

BobN
Chair