[NSIS] Proposal to move the QSPEC work forward

Jukka MJ Manner <jmanner@cs.Helsinki.FI> Tue, 17 October 2006 14:49 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZqFn-0001JY-UT; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:49:15 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZqFn-0001JS-0D for nsis@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:49:15 -0400
Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi ([128.214.9.1] helo=mail.cs.helsinki.fi) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZqFi-0000Va-MF for nsis@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:49:14 -0400
Received: from sbz-31.cs.helsinki.fi (sbz-31.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.99]) (TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:49:03 +0300 id 000AFD6B.4534ED5F.00004A33
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:49:03 +0300
From: Jukka MJ Manner <jmanner@cs.Helsinki.FI>
To: nsis@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610171739462.31945@sbz-31.cs.Helsinki.FI>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32
Subject: [NSIS] Proposal to move the QSPEC work forward
X-BeenThere: nsis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Next Steps in Signaling <nsis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis>, <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:nsis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis>, <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: nsis-bounces@ietf.org

Hi all,

If this QSPEC debate will not end soon with some kind of solution, in 
order to get at least some of the QSPEC work forward, I propose to

1. Make the QSPEC Template just define parameters and their encoding for 
   QoS Model designers to be used. Loose the QSPEC-1 vs. QSPEC-2 concept.

2. Move _all_ this interworking debate to another draft, which describes 
   how to achieve interworking between domains implementing different QoS 
   Models.


We need the QSPEC Template and the object encoding rules in order to get 
people design new QoS Models. This latter draft will probably be difficult 
to achieve, but at least we would get the spec out for people who are 
interested to design their own QoS Models.

Before the latter draft is done, all QoS Model documents would be 
Informational. Once the latter draft is done, QoS Model authors may update 
their spec based on the interworking rules, and seek to move their QoS 
Models to Standards Track.

Jukka

_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
nsis@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis