Subject: FilterList in IPSP context

From: Mircea Pana <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 10:58:02 -0500

The IPSec Policy model uses "FilterList" and indicates that it is
defined in "[CIMNETWORK]".
On the other hand, the IPSec Policy model is based upon the core policy
classes defined in PCIM and PCIMe. The later redefines the "FilterList"
class with an additional restriction relative to the redefined
"EntriesInFilterList" aggregation. See PCIMe Section 4.9.2 second
paragraph and Section 5.21 second paragraph.

Does the restriction defined by PCIMe apply in the context of IPSP
submodel? Or does IPSP override the PCIMe "FilterList" semantics with
the original CIMNETWORK ones? 

Regards,
Mircea.

---

From: "Lee Rafalow" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 12:08:51 -0500

Another good catch Mircea.

If I remember correctly, our intent was to change CIM as well but I don't
see a Change Request anywhere.  For simplicity for now, we should make
another edit to the IPsec Configuration Policy Model so that it points to
PCIMe rather than CIM.

Thanks, Lee

---

From: "Andrea Westerinen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 23:57:39 -0800

Actually, the CR is on the docket for discussion on next week's Network
call.  It just adds a default value of 0 to the property in the aggregation.
This CR is part of the realignment of the QoS work between DMTF and IETF.
It will be released as part of CIM V2.7 Networks.

In the end, documenting either PCIMe or CIM Networks will be the same :-).
However, it will not be a mandatory value in CIM Networks - since it has no
reason to exist if all that we do is AND together FilterEntryBases.

Andrea

-----Original Message-----
From: Lee Rafalow [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 9:09 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: FilterList in IPSP context

Thanks, Lee