Subject: Re: Policy Framework Documents

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 13:55:52 -0500

The following is being forwarded to the policy mailing list.
Message originally sent by "Chris Martin" <[email-masked]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

To correct my misunderstanding...

When I wrote this, I didn't realize that there was a change in wording as to the
Description of the working group.  One
phrase has changed some time in the last several weeks (from my printout of the
original email notification) from:

5. The charter specifically excludes: -protocol definition

to:

5. The charter specifically excludes: -discussion of protocols to exchange policy
information

I'm not sure what this means, exactly, since the Policy Framework Core Information
Model document [Policy framework document] defines a schema that "...is intended for
realization in a directory that uses LDAP as its access protocol; however, it is
also intended to be extensible...."   I'm not sure I agree with excluding discussion
of protocols to exchange policy information, although I realize it [the protocols]
should not be the focus of the WG.

chm

[email-masked] wrote:

> The following is being forwarded to the policy mailing list.
> Message originally sent by "Chris Martin" <[email-masked]>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Policy List:
>
> More comments on draft-ietf-policy-framework-pfdl-00.txt
>
> 1. Concerning the following in the Abstract:
>
> "The PFDL is the common 'currency' that is exchanged between these heterogeneous
> components to enable them all to perform their function in providing, securing,
> distributing, and administering policy. The PFDL becomes the way to ensure that
> multiple vendors interpret the policy the same way while enabling vendors to
> provide value-added services."
>
> I understand that the charter specifically excludes (new?) protocol definition,
> but shouldn't the policy framework provide a hint as to how the above will be
> accomplished?  As part of the framework, I'd like to see what PFDL distribution
> methods are applicable, to allow vendor-independent application of policy.  From
> what I see, it isn't accessed via LDAP or COPS, and isn't even directory server
> related.  The distribution method may be as a text file (access via ftp) or
> encoded somehow (as PFDL tokens?) between policy servers.  Some description in
> the framework text would be helpful.
>

[...omitted]