I think its a good idea to readdress this. Part of the issue with the current system, is that there is both no great benefit to advancing a standard to the next level for the advocates, and no real downside to not advancing it. In many cases, having gone through the pain of getting to RFC status, one is unwilling to place their body in the firing line again. Any change to the system should consider the real world implications and try and add in the appropriate carrots and sticks. One side note - MIBs. MIBs by their nature are actually collections of mini-standards - the objects. Once an object is defined and published in a non-transitional document (RFC), the OID associated with that object is pretty much stuck with that definition. And that permanance tends to percolate up to the collection of objects that make up a MIB. I'd suggest only a single standards level for a MIB - stable - tied to a specific conformance statement. Obviously, this is sort of a sketch of an idea, but given the immutability of each MIB object, advancing a MIB is pretty much impossible unless there are absolutely no changes. Mike _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf