abandoning ike-monitor-mib, isakmp-di-mon-mib, and monitor-mib?

[John Shriver <jshriver+ietf@sockeye.com>]

OK, let's try and sort out the MIB issues one decision at a time.  The 
first thing is to decide if we want to abandon the original set of MIBs:

   draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-monitor-mib-04.txt,
   draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-di-mon-mib-05.txt, and
   draft-ietf-ipsec-monitor-mib-06.txt

They have never attracted much interest.  Neither of the original 
authors work in the IPsec marketplace anymore, so they can't contribute 
any implementations to get them through the standards process.  I think 
that there is only one implementation of them, ever.

Moreover, both the ISAKMP and IKE MIB modules would require MAJOR 
rewriting to be compatible with IKE Version 2.  Like merging them, since 
the ISAKMP/IKE layering is extinct in v2.

So, given this set of considerable problems, is there anyone who wants 
these MIBs to track the IPsec standards going forwards, and can find 
resources to update them and implement them?

If nobody wants to do this, will we take the lack of any dissent on 
their death as "consensus" per the "IETF Process"?


I *NEED* to know this, because there are a number of TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS 
in the doi-tc-mib that were only used by these three MIBs, and are not 
used by the IPsec flow MIB, or by the Policy MIB.  Since it looks like 
the doi-tc-mib will NOT be maintained by the IANA (no enumerations), the 
TC's have to be used in some MIB to progress through the standards 
process, so we can't stock up on "spare" TCs for possible future needs.


So, please consider this a "last call", only for termination instead of 
promotion along the standards track.