RE: Evaluation: draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model - Information Model for Describing Network Device QoS Datapath Mechanisms

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

>         Please return the full line with your position.
> 
>                       Yes  No-Objection  Discuss  Abstain
> Bert Wijnen          [ X ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]

Thanks,
Bert 
p.s. So this is the first time I did all of the preparations
for getting this on agenda via the web-interface.
I have also registered a YES vote via the web, although I did
so as the last action on my set of actions. Should I do that
first, before I press: "IESG review" status?

Bert
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IESG Secretary [mailto:iesg-secretary@ietf.org]
> Sent: donderdag 3 juli 2003 15:10
> To: Internet Engineering Steering Group
> Subject: Evaluation: draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model -
> Information Model for Describing Network Device QoS Datapath 
> Mechanisms
> 
> 
> --------
> 
> Last Call to expire on: 2003-06-17
> 
>         Please return the full line with your position.
> 
>                       Yes  No-Objection  Discuss  Abstain
> Harald Alvestrand    [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Steve Bellovin       [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Randy Bush           [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Bill Fenner          [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Ned Freed            [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Ted Hardie           [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Russ Housley         [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Allison Mankin       [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Thomas Narten        [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Erik Nordmark        [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Jon Peterson         [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Bert Wijnen          [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> Alex Zinin           [   ]     [   ]     [   ]     [   ]
> 
> 2/3 (9) Yes or No-Objection opinions needed to pass.
> 
> DISCUSSES AND COMMENTS:
> ======================
> 
> 
> 
> ^L 
> To: IETF-Announce:; 
> Dcc: *******
> Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@isi.edu>,
>  Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>, policy@ietf.org
> From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
> Subject: Protocol Action: Information Model for Describing 
> Network Device QoS 
>      Datapath Mechanisms to Proposed Standard 
> -------------
> 
> The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft 'Information Model 
> for Describing 
> Network Device QoS Datapath Mechanisms' 
> <draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model-10.txt> as a 
> Proposed Standard. 
> This document is the product of the Policy Framework Working 
> Group. The 
> IESG contact persons are Randy Bush and Bert Wijnen 
> 
> The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft 'Information Model 
> for Describing 
> Network Device QoS Datapath Mechanisms' 
> <draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model-10.txt> as a 
> Proposed Standard.
> This document is the product of the Policy Framework Working Group.
> The IESG contact persons are Randy Bush and Bert Wijnen
> 
>  
> Technical Summary
>  
>  The purpose of this document is to define an information model to
>  describe the quality of service (QoS) mechanisms inherent in
>  different network devices, including hosts.  Broadly speaking,
>  these mechanisms describe the properties common to selecting and
>  conditioning traffic through the forwarding path (datapath) of a
>  network device.  This selection and conditioning of traffic in
>  the datapath spans both major QoS architectures: Differentiated
>  Services and Integrated Services.
> 
>  This documen should be used with the QoS Policy Information Model
>  (QPIM) to model how policies can be defined to manage and configure
>  the QoS mechanisms (i.e., the classification, marking, metering,
>  dropping, queuing, and scheduling functionality) of devices.
>  Together, these two drafts describe how to write QoS policy rules
>  to configure and manage the QoS mechanisms present in the datapaths
>  of devices.
> 
>  This document, as well as QPIM, are information models.  That is,
>  they represent information independent of a binding to a specific
>  type of repository. 
> 
> Working Group Summary
>  
>  The Working Group has consensus on this document to be published as
>  Proposed Standard.
>  
> Protocol Quality
>  
>  This document has been reviewed for the IESG by Bert Wijnen
> 
> RFC-Editor notes:
> 
> - 2nd para of abstract
>   OLD:
>    This documenthis document 
>   NEW:
>    This document
> 
> - Co-Author Walter Weiss is now at: walterweiss@attbi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>