RE: A Proposal for Moving Forward on draft-ietf-radext-ieee802

["Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)" <paul.congdon@hp.com>]

At the last meeting we decided to remove QoS-Filter-Rule from the draft.

The next draft is very nearly ready to go. Mauricio is on vacation until
the 9th, so it should be out very shortly after that.  We were waiting
to resolve all issues before publishing another version, but perhaps
that isn't be best approach.

Paul  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net] 
> Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 12:30 PM
> To: Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)
> Cc: Bernard Aboba; radiusext@ops.ietf.org; Sanchez, Mauricio 
> (PNB Roseville)
> Subject: Re: A Proposal for Moving Forward on 
> draft-ietf-radext-ieee802
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> what are your plans regarding the usage of the 
> QoS-Filter-Rule described in Section 3.6 of 
> <draft-ietf-radext-ieee802-00.txt>?
> 
> Currently the draft only points to Section 4.3 of RFC 3588. 
> RFC 3588, however, only specifies the ability to carry a flow 
> identifier (referred as IPFilterRule) with a DiffServ Code Point.
> 
> At the last IETF meeting I got the impression that more 
> detailed QoS parameters should be discussed in another 
> document. In fact there is already one that proposes more 
> detailed parameters.
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes
> 
> Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve) wrote:
> > We are very near publishing the next version with all of 
> the filtering 
> > issues resolved.  I would like to publish this version and see how 
> > well that draft proceeds.  If the filtering function 
> continues to hold 
> > up this version, then we should consider your proposal.  
> I'll will get 
> > a firm date on when the next version will be published.
> > 
> > Paul
> > 
> > 
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> >>[mailto:owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
> >>Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 1:08 AM
> >>To: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> >>Subject: A Proposal for Moving Forward on draft-ietf-radext-ieee802
> >>
> >>It is now more than 6 months since draft-ietf-radext-ieee802 went 
> >>through WG last call, and progress on resolving the Issues from WG 
> >>last call has been slow.  This document is now a year 
> behind schedule 
> >>-- and
> >>counting.   We 
> >>need to find a way to make more rapid progress.
> >>
> >>Looking over the Last Call issues, it would appear that the 
> majority 
> >>of them relate to the filtering functionality, and relatively few 
> >>comments relate to the VLAN and Priority functionality.
> >>
> >>In order to enable this document to be completed without further 
> >>delays, I would like to propose that the Filtering functionality be 
> >>removed from this document, and allowed to progress separately.
> >>
> >>This would allow for an -01 version of this documented to be posted 
> >>within the next two weeks, followed by a two week WG last call, and 
> >>submission to the IESG by IETF 65.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>to unsubscribe send a message to
> >>radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with the word 'unsubscribe' 
> in a single 
> >>line as the message text body.
> >>archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>
> >>
> > 
> > --
> > to unsubscribe send a message to 
> radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with 
> > the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> > archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>