RFC 3290 on An Informal Management Model for Diffserv Routers

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.


        RFC 3290

        Title:	    An Informal Management Model for Diffserv Routers
        Author(s):  Y. Bernet, S. Blake, D. Grossman, A. Smith
        Status:	    Informational
	Date:       May 2002
        Mailbox:    [email protected], [email protected],
                    [email protected], [email protected]
        Pages:      56
        Characters: 129443
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:    None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-diffserv-model-06.txt

        URL:        ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3290.txt


This document proposes an informal management model of Differentiated
Services (Diffserv) routers for use in their management and
configuration.  This model defines functional datapath elements (e.g.,
classifiers, meters, actions, marking, absolute dropping, counting,
multiplexing), algorithmic droppers, queues and schedulers.  It
describes possible configuration parameters for these elements and how
they might be interconnected to realize the range of traffic
conditioning and per-hop behavior (PHB) functionalities described in
the Diffserv Architecture.

This document is a product of the Differentiated Services Working
Group of the IETF.

This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list.
Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list
should be sent to [email protected].  Requests to be
added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should
be sent to [email protected].

Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending
an EMAIL message to [email protected] with the message body 
help: ways_to_get_rfcs.  For example:

        To: [email protected]
        Subject: getting rfcs

        help: ways_to_get_rfcs

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to [email protected].  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.echo 
Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to
[email protected].  Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC
Authors, for further information.


Joyce K. Reynolds and Sandy Ginoza
USC/Information Sciences Institute

...

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader 
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version
of the RFCs.