Subject: RE: [Ieprep] policy & labels

From: "Gunn, Janet" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 13:59:02 -0400

Yes, that satisfies it (as do a number of other schemes).  But is there a
one-to-one mapping between namespace and policy?  If I remember correctly, I
thought I was corrected when I used "GETS" as an example of a name space.
-----Original Message-----
From: Henning Schulzrinne [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 12:22 PM
To: Gunn, Janet
Cc: 'Ken Carlberg'; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Ieprep] policy & labels

While I'll get slapped with a wet noodle for mentioning solutions, I had 
   proposed a scheme, namely namespace.label, which may satisfy your 
requirements. 'namespace' identifies the name space (such as GETS). This 
allows everybody to have a high, low and medium label. Since there 
doesn't seem to be an existing name space, namespaces and labels would 
be registered with IANA. The number is likely going to be small.

Gunn, Janet wrote:
> True, but in order to be useful (both for human and machine comprehension)
> there then needs to be a structure to the set of labels, and we need to
get
> approval to use them that way.  So I still think that identifying the
> policies we will want to implement is an important part of figuring out
how
> we want to structure the labels.
> 
>
_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 16:35:18 -0400

> thought I was corrected when I used "GETS" as an example of a name space.

No, the namespace identifies the policy "group", typically borrowed from 
  some existing PSTN scheme that we want to interwork with. An example 
namespace might be Q735 (for Q.735 labels).

Unless I'm fundamentally misunderstanding something here, nobody is 
proposing an Internet-specific new namespace at this time.