Re: draft of a core protocol spec

OK. We'll work with our vendors and will look forward to seeing
mailing list discussions.

Thanks,
Helen.

At 11:27 AM 11/7/2002 -0500, albherre wrote:
>On the current charter, we've set a re-charter
>milestone of March 2003 to address extended features.
>This does not stop the WG from discussing the
>issues now. It's actually best to start thinking about
>these extended features now to avoid long
>delays/discussions when the time comes.
>
>Albert
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Helen Butcher" <[email protected]>
>To: "albherre" <[email protected]>; "Leon Bruckman" <[email protected]>;
>"'Frank Kastenholz'" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
>Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:54 AM
>Subject: Re: [IPORPR] draft of a core protocol spec
>
>
> > At 09:59 AM 11/7/2002 -0500, albherre wrote:
> > >Leon,
> > >
> > >Just a suggestion after a quick read.
> > >
> > > > lb] We could at least define the mapping of DiffServe to the RPR 
> service
> > > > classes
> > > >
> > > > lb] We should at least specify the default mapping of DSCP into classes
> > > >
> > >
> > >ah] I would suggest we leave Diffserv mappings out of the
> > >core spec and address these when we re-charter for future work
> > >as per the current charter.
> >
> > As a service provider company, we have interest to see how DiffServe
> > will be supported by RPR. If it is put off to a future time, it would be
> > helpful
> > to indicate when it will be addressed.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Helen.
> >