RE: What to do with: draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model-08.txt

Of those service providers interested in IP QoS,
I believe there is interest and potential applications for different qos
policy mechanisms -
-the query of a directory for qos policy information  (e.g LDAP etc.)
-the push of new qos configuration information to the network element ( e.g.
COPS-PR,  SNMPCONF etc.).
A multiservice network may need to support both mechanisms at the same time.
I believe the QPIM was intended to bring alignment of these other concrete
schemas.

I'd like to have a document to reference for some equipment specifications
that I am developing.
so I would like to see the QPIM progressed. Certainly, the anomalies that
you pointed out need to be addressed to make it a useful specification.

If this is a standards track document, then I understand your question to
relate to the standard process for standards track documents where there is
a requirement for interoperable implementations to be demonstrated.  So if
the standard concerns an abstract information model, what is the
implementation anyway -  a concrete schema or running code in a router? For
this reason I could well see this being classified as an Informational RFC.

Now look forward a little in time, let's be optimistic and assume the LDAP
schema is implemented. Can the LDAP schema use the QPIM RFC as a normative
specification if it is classified as Informational RFC? or must it be (re)
classified as Standards track ?

I don't see a rational for calling it experimental, but I'm willing to be
educated.

Regarding QPIM/QDDIM/LDAP Schema relationships, is there a need for an
Applicability statement - would that be the appropriate way to handle it?

Steven Wright
Science & Technology
BellSouth


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 1:04 PM
> To: Joel Halpern (E-mail); Ed Ellesson (E-mail)
> Cc: Randy Bush (E-mail); [email protected]
> Subject: [Policy] What to do with:
> draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model-08.txt
>
>
> I have posted my AD review to the policy WG mailing list today.
>
> Last week Friday I posted my review of QPIM.
>
> I wonder... for both documents, but specifically for this one:
>
>    Do we really want this (still) to be standards track.
>
> My reasoning:
>
> - We (or at least I) have seen interest in this space dimish
>   (if not dissappear completely)
>
> - The document has a lot of places where it talks about more
>   work that could be done, should be done, and how together
>   with that work, this would be something good. Specifically
>   a mapping to LDAP Schema . But as far as I know, we see not
>   interest in that. Do we?
>   And then, if no such docs will ever show up, what use do these
>   docs then have?
>
> - I believe I saw some ( a little) interest expressed to do an
>   LDAP Schema mapping. But not for QPIM and QDDIM, do I ?
>
> So maybe Informational or Experiemntal is better?
>
> Just thinking aloud here.
> Pls send me your comments.
>
> Thanks,
> Bert
> _______________________________________________
> Policy mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy
>