Subject: RE: RAP Working Group Re-chartering

From: "Hahn, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 08:49:56 -0800

Juergen,
I think you are reading more into this than there is. This paragraph refers
to the ongoing SPPI and Framework PIB. The SPPI is at the hands of the IESG.
The framework PIB went through WG last call, but resulted in a few minor
changes and I believe will do another last call. These were left in the
charter because the work is still going on. It is *not* another SPPI.
	-Scott 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 8:29 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: RAP Working Group Re-chartering
> 
> 
> 
> >>>>> Mark L Stevens writes:
> 
> Mark> - A standards track defining object syntax for carrying policy
> Mark> provisioning information ("Object Syntax"): The working group
> Mark> will produce standards track RFCs that specify the syntax of
> Mark> objects and their contents for carrying policy information. The
> Mark> working group will specifically focus on the syntax of objects
> Mark> needed for carrying information related to QoS policy
> Mark> provisioning [SPPI] [FRWKPIB].
> 
> Can someone please explain what this means? Is it about defining PIBs?
> Is it about defining another SPPI language? Is it about both? Or is it
> something completely different? What do you mean with "object syntax"?
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder      Technical University Braunschweig
> <[email-masked]>  Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks
> Phone: +49 531 391 3289    Bueltenweg 74/75, 38106 
> Braunschweig, Germany
> Fax:   +49 531 391 5936    <URL:http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/~schoenw/>
> 
> 
> 
>

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 11:47:55 +0100

>>>>> Hahn, Scott writes:

Scott> Juergen, I think you are reading more into this than there
Scott> is. This paragraph refers to the ongoing SPPI and Framework
Scott> PIB. The SPPI is at the hands of the IESG.  The framework PIB
Scott> went through WG last call, but resulted in a few minor changes
Scott> and I believe will do another last call. These were left in the
Scott> charter because the work is still going on. It is *not* another
Scott> SPPI.

OK, I now understand what the text was trying to say. Perhaps the
charter text on this point could be simplified as follows:

  - Complete work on standards track documents for (a) the data
    definition language for COPS-PR [SPPI] and (b) the set of core
    data definitions for QoS policy provisioning [FRWKPIB].

This text would have been much clearer to me.

/js