Hi, RFC4181 has guidelines for authors and reviewers of MIB documents. It has a lot of guidance about how to organize your document, and what boilerplate to use. It also contains a lot of guidance about writing a MIB.
Tools.ietf.org has templates for documents containing a MIB module. There is a plaintext template, a plaintext template with guidance, and an xml2rfc template with guidance. The templates were developed by/with the MIB Doctors, and the guidance is largely based on RFC4181 guidance about a document that contains a MIB module. The templates do NOT contain guidance on how to write a MIB. I authored the templates and haven't touched them in years, but RFC4181 hasn't changed either, so the templates probably still contain fairly good guidance on the document organization. The boilerplate in the templates is probably old. The O&M wiki page contains current boilerplate recommendations for MIB documents. This is the most up-to-date recommendation for boilerplate text. It also has textual conventions that you are encouraged to use rather than reinventing any wheels. I'm not sure textual-conventions come into play in your document though. The wiki also points to tools to check your MIB module; the tools typically check for many of the RFC4181 nits and the RFC Editor nits. Hope this helps, David Harrington [email protected] +1-603-828-1401 > -----Original Message----- > From: OPSAWG [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL > Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 10:34 AM > To: Johannes Merkle; t.petch; [email protected] > Cc: Manfred Lochter > Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: New Version Notification fordraft-hmac-sha-2- > usm-snmp-00.txt > > On 3/28/14 9:21 , "Johannes Merkle" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >t.petch wrote on 27.03.2014 19:02: > >>Normally, anything with a MIB Module in it contains standard MIB > >> boilerplate about the standard management framework; but this MIB > Module > >> contains no objects, just identities, so does it need the boilerplate? > >> I would say not, but RFC4181 says it does (which in turn drags in four > >> more references)! need guidance there. You should at least include > >> RFC2578 in the references since that appears in this MIB module. > >> > >> I must re-read RFC4181 - I suspect that there is more in there to be > >> added to this I-D. > > > >I am not familiar with MIBs, thus I appreciate your and Uri's assistance. > >Isn't RFC 3826 a proper example how to do it? > > I'm afraid this is out of my competence area. I've no clue regarding > boilerplates, and can help only with the actual MIB content (that ASN.1 > stuff :). > > Sorry! _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
