Subject: [Ieprep] IEPREP SIP REQ-7

From: "Gunn, Janet" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 16:25:02 -0400

"REQ-7: Separation of indication and policy: The indication
             should not describe a particular detailed treatment, as it
             is likely that this depends on the nature of the resource
             and local policy.  Instead, it should invoke a particular
             named policy. As an example, instead of specifying that a
             certain SIP request should be granted queueing priority,
             not cause preemption, but be restricted to three-minute
             sessions, the requests invokes a certain named policy that
             may well have those properties."

Now we have added the word "indication".  Is this the same as "mechanism for
marking"?  If not, how is it different.
We have also added the word "treatment".  Does this mean "mechanism for
providing preferential service"?  In this context is "policy" simply a
"mapping from a 'mechanism for marking' to a 'mechanism for providing
preferential service'"? If so, we need to say so.  If not, what is it? 

The way they are currently worded, REQ 2 and REQ 7 appear, if not
contradictory, at least ambiguous.  I think I understand what you mean, but
only as the result of several exchanges on the list.
_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 21:58:31 -0400

I will strive to use the word "indication" consistently throughout the 
document. I hope it strikes the right balance between avoiding 
terminology overload ("mechanism") and being too specific.