Subject: RE: [NSIS] jerry, dave,cornelia's proposal very confusing and not solving problem

From: "Roy, Radhika R." <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 20:07:15 -0500

Inline [RRR]

  _____  

From: [email-masked] on behalf of David R Oran
Sent: Fri 11/3/2006 8:43 AM
To: Georgios Karagiannis
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [NSIS] jerry, dave,cornelia's proposal very confusing and not
solving problem

> After that we can submit the QSPEC template draft for last WG call. If
> after the deployment phase we conclude that more mandatory parameters
> are needed for interoperability then we could work on an interworking
> draft.
>
The fact we might need interworking drafts is a big red flag for me 
anyway.

[RRR] Is not the case the whole QSPEC draft shows how all these RSVP,
DiffServ, IntServ, Y.1541, 3GPP/Y.1541, and DSTE are interworking? Does the
draft not show that QSPEC template has a magic for interworking among all of
them? 

[RRR] The question is this: Can we we not find which ones interwork and
which ones are not? If so, why should the NSIS QSPEC draft deals with those
QOS models that do NOT interwork among themselves?

[RRR] If there are some "bad"apples of QOS models have been injected using
some "brute" forces knowing they will NEVER interwork, why the whole NSIS WG
members, in fact the whole IETF community, will pay the heavy price of
"NON-Interowkring?"

[RRR] Why is the NSIS QSPEC standard putting the seeds of
"Non-Interoperability"  mixing between "Water" and "Oil" in the same draft
deliberately in a "Standard Track RFC?"

Cheers, DaveO.

> --------------
> Best Regards,
> Georgios

_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis

---

From: "Roy, Radhika R." <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 21:07:56 -0500

I understand the old story ....
 
Let us also see that this QSPEC draft is dealing with "Interoperability."
Please see that the draft itself has used the "interoperability" word
probably more 100 times. Please the all the big figures of
"Interoperability."
 
That is, the draft itself is nothing but "interoperability."
 
If it is so, why are we forcing "Non-Interoperability" in the first place?
If there is a way to solve this problem, what is the problem? One of the
suggestions may be look into the thread as follows:

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nsis/current/msg07149.html
<http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nsis/current/msg07149.html> 

  _____  

From: [email-masked] on behalf of Fred Baker
Sent: Fri 11/3/2006 2:15 PM
To: Georgios Karagiannis
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [NSIS] jerry, dave,cornelia's proposal very confusing and not
solving problem

On Nov 2, 2006, at 10:27 PM, Georgios Karagiannis wrote:
> The proposal mentions in point 2) point B):
>
> "All other QSPEC parameters are optional to include by the QNI, and 
> may
> be either mandatory or optional to interpret by downstream QNEs."

If I may point out a problem...

Generally speaking, optional capabilities create a diode. Some of us 
will recall the antics os the ISO protocol suite in the 1980's. It 
was in many ways a good piece of work, and there are some bits (IS-IS 
and ASN.1 come to mind, and the conceptual carry-over of ES-IS into 
IPv6 ND) that are still in use. The big thing that made it hard to 
use and ultimately triggered its collapse was the optional sets of 
parameters - every product built was compliant under some profile of 
selected options or another, but few were really interoperable. As a 
result, at the end of the day the solution didn't work.

With something where one has multiple products from multiple vendors 
that wind up constituting a set of needles that a transaction has to 
simultaneously thread, optional capabilities are a real liability. In 
the end, it is the mandatory-to-implement-and-use subset that will be 
interoperable end to end.

I would really suggest that we use optional capabilities as an 
upgrade path - if someone doesn't understand an option it will be 
passed along unchanged - but in the general case avoid optional 
capabilities like the plague.