Re: Hard questions (was: Diffserv PIB approved as Informational RFC)

[...]
>> > You correctly note that there are difficult problems that remain in
>> > diffserv, but it's not clear that they can be solved in an IETF WG.
>> > So, I would say that we are taking a breather before finishing the
>> > job and further that the breather is required so we can get some
>> > experience.
>>
>> I think that addresses my question.  The question back to you is "until
>> when"?
>>
>
> I think you need to address that question to our AD. I'm not
> sure what event would be considered the appropriate one
> to start a new WG, though I heard in NSIS that they wanted
> to take another stab at defining "quality of service classes"
> so maybe the charter is going to be changed.

Being active in NSIS, we basically ruled service definitions and 
specifications out of scope. I think the service definition is partly too 
difficult and on the other hand a service providers differentiater to offer 
the service markets want.

I feel it is not the task of the IETF to define it, even so I think a small 
number of basic PDB would help first deployments.

Marcus

>
> 	Kathie
>
> _______________________________________________
> diffserv mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
> Archive:
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist
> .html
>



--------------------------------------
Dr. Marcus Brunner
Network Laboratories
NEC Europe Ltd.

E-Mail: [email protected]
WWW:    http://www.ccrle.nec.de/
personal home page: http://www.brubers.org/marcus



_______________________________________________
diffserv mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html