From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 5 04:00:17 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA02840 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 04:00:17 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0599vX17363 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 04:09:57 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0595gJ16686; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 04:05:42 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0593nJ16645 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 04:03:49 -0500 Received: from sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA02792 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 03:53:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com [171.71.163.14]) by sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h058u8jS007019; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 00:56:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from ANDREAWW2K (andreaw-frame1.cisco.com [10.19.253.186]) by mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.1-GA) with SMTP id ACX45426; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 00:53:43 -0800 (PST) From: "Andrea Westerinen" To: "Pana, Mircea" , , "IETF Policy \(E-mail\)" Subject: RE: [Policy] ENUM property values Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 00:56:38 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2B455.4DAE65D0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2B455.4DAE65D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit RE: [Policy] ENUM property valuesFollowing up on this thread, DMTF's CIM uses 0 as "unknown". We try to avoid using it for other enum values, for consistency. Andrea -----Original Message----- From: policy-admin@ietf.org [mailto:policy-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Pana, Mircea Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 8:47 AM To: 'brunner@ccrle.nec.de'; IETF Policy (E-mail) Subject: RE: [Policy] ENUM property values Is 0 (zero) avoided in the model(s) to allow implementations to reserve it for special situations that are outside the scope of the model? Are there examples where 0 (zero) makes an implementation less robust? Thanks, Mircea. -----Original Message----- From: Marcus Brunner [mailto:brunner@ccrle.nec.de] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 11:37 AM To: Pana, Mircea; IETF Policy (E-mail) Subject: Re: [Policy] ENUM property values I normally is good practice to start enums with 1 (Most of the MIB definition follow this practice). Normally, it makes implemetnations more robust when starting with 1. Marcus --On Montag, 2. Dezember 2002 08:54 -0600 "Pana, Mircea" wrote: > > Most ENUM property values in Policy documents use consecutive integers > starting at 1. The integer value 0 (zero) is skipped. Was there a > particular reason for this? Some implementers would prefer such values to > start at 0. > > Thanks, > Mircea. -------------------------------------- Dr. Marcus Brunner Network Laboratories NEC Europe Ltd. E-Mail: brunner@ccrle.nec.de WWW: http://www.ccrle.nec.de/ Phone: +49 (0) 6221 905 11 29 personal home page: http://www.brubers.org/marcus ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2B455.4DAE65D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [Policy] ENUM property values
Following up on this thread, DMTF's CIM uses = 0 as=20 "unknown".  We try to avoid using it for other enum values, = for=20 consistency.
 
Andrea 
-----Original Message-----
From: = policy-admin@ietf.org=20 [mailto:policy-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Pana, = Mircea
Sent:=20 Tuesday, December 03, 2002 8:47 AM
To: = 'brunner@ccrle.nec.de'; IETF=20 Policy (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [Policy] ENUM property=20 values

Is 0 (zero) avoided in the model(s) to allow = implementations=20 to reserve it for special situations that are outside the scope of the = model?=20 Are there examples where 0 (zero) makes an implementation less=20 robust?

Thanks,
Mircea. =



-----Original Message-----
From:=20 Marcus Brunner [mailto:brunner@ccrle.nec.de]=20
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 11:37 AM =
To: Pana, Mircea; IETF Policy (E-mail)
Subject:=20 Re: [Policy] ENUM property values


I normally is good practice to start enums with 1 = (Most of the=20 MIB
definition follow this practice). = Normally, it=20 makes implemetnations more
robust when = starting with=20 1.

Marcus

--On Montag, 2. Dezember 2002 08:54 -0600 "Pana, = Mircea"=20
<mpana@metasolv.com> wrote: =

>
> Most ENUM = property values in=20 Policy documents use consecutive integers
>=20 starting at 1. The integer value 0 (zero) is skipped. Was there = a=20
> particular reason for this? Some implementers = would=20 prefer such values to
> start at = 0.=20
>
> Thanks, =
> Mircea.



-------------------------------------- =
Dr. Marcus Brunner
Network = Laboratories=20
NEC Europe Ltd.

E-Mail: brunner@ccrle.nec.de
WWW:    http://www.ccrle.nec.de/
Phone: +49=20 (0) 6221 905 11 29
personal home page: http://www.brubers.org/marcus=20

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2B455.4DAE65D0-- _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 6 11:21:28 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06387 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:21:28 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h06GVk727777 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:31:46 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h06GRBJ27551; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:27:11 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h06GPeJ27464 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:25:40 -0500 Received: from mx-relay2.treas.gov (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06262 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:14:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from tias5.treas.gov (tias-gw5.treas.gov [199.196.144.15]) by mx-relay2.treas.gov (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id h06GI5MH020637 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:18:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailhub.net.treas.gov by tias5.treas.gov via smtpd (for mx-relay.treas.gov [199.196.144.6]) with SMTP; 6 Jan 2003 16:18:05 UT Received: from irsbd1.net.treas.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub-2.net.treas.gov (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h06GHxjj016351 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:18:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from no.name.available by irsbd1.net.treas.gov via smtpd (for mailhub.net.treas.gov [10.7.8.10]) with ESMTP; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:17:59 -0500 Received: from parnelli.indy.cr.irs.gov (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mears.indy.cr.irs.gov (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h06GHxf31567 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:17:59 -0500 Message-ID: <3E19AC37.6070607@parnelli.indy.cr.irs.gov> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 11:17:59 -0500 From: "Larry S. Bartz" Organization: Internal Revenue Service User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020827 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: policy@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Policy] I-D ACTION:draft-bartz-lsb-policy-rule-components-00.txt References: <200212111312.IAA03562@ietf.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote, On 12/11/2002 08:12 AM: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > > > Title : Logically Succinct Basic Policy Rule Components > Author(s) : L. Bartz > Filename : draft-bartz-lsb-policy-rule-components-00.txt > Pages : 46 > Date : 2002-12-9 > > Logically Succinct Basic Policy Rule Components (LSBPRC) provides > model extensions to the Policy Core Information Model (PCIM) and > implementable extensions to the Policy Core LDAP Schema (PCLS) in > which the logic of conditions and actions can be succinctly expressed > and explicitly interpreted. LSBPRC offers a direct and invariant > connection between the rule designer's intention and the rule > interpreter's evaluation of the rulebase. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bartz-lsb-policy-rule-components-00.txt > [snip] I am preparing the "01" version of this draft. Any comments on the "00" are welcome. -- -- #::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::| # Larry Bartz | | # lbartz@parnelli.indy.cr.irs.gov | Ooo, ooo, | # | Ooo, ooo, oooooo! | # | I've got a gnu attitude! | # voice (317) 226-7060 | | # FAX (317) 226-6378 | | #::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::| _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 9 10:05:45 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA13705 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 10:05:45 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h09FHTm29813 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 10:17:29 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h09FDEJ29596; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 10:13:14 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h09FBJJ29524 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 10:11:19 -0500 Received: from srvmaddog.metasolv.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA13389 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:59:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail.metasolv.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:03:38 -0600 Message-ID: From: "Pana, Mircea" To: "IETF Policy (E-mail)" Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:00:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2B7EF.C8EDF560" Subject: [Policy] PCIMe: the aggregation ContainedDomain Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B7EF.C8EDF560 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" The aggregation ContainedDomain includes: "GroupComponent[ref AdminDomain [0..n]]" IMO the cardinality should be "0..1" instead of "0...n". In other words: A ReusablePolicyContainer can contain zero or more ReusablePolicyContainer instances. A ReusablePolicyContainer can be a root-level container (for the context) or it can be contained by one single other ReusablePolicyContainer. Regards, Mircea. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B7EF.C8EDF560 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable PCIMe: the aggregation ContainedDomain

The aggregation ContainedDomain = includes:
"GroupComponent[ref AdminDomain = [0..n]]"
IMO the cardinality should be = "0..1" instead of "0...n". In other words: A = ReusablePolicyContainer can contain zero or more  = ReusablePolicyContainer instances. A ReusablePolicyContainer can be a = root-level container (for the context) or it can be contained by one = single other ReusablePolicyContainer.

Regards,
Mircea.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B7EF.C8EDF560-- _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 11 02:14:24 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA07252 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2003 02:14:24 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0B7Qut04648 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 11 Jan 2003 02:26:56 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0B7MfJ04106; Sat, 11 Jan 2003 02:22:41 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0B7IJJ04005 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2003 02:18:19 -0500 Received: from shardagate.mahindrabt.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA04159 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2003 02:05:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from thisdomain (mailscan.sharda.mahindrabt.com [10.5.0.97]) by shardagate.mahindrabt.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id MAA21486 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:38:27 +0530 Received: from intranet.sharda.mahindrabt.com by mahindrabt.com ; Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:27:43 +0530 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:27:43 +0530 X-Originating-IP: 10.5.0.15 X-Auth-User: pujarig@mahindrabt.com Received: from pujarig ([10.5.5.226]) by intranet.sharda.mahindrabt.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA20683 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:38:19 +0530 Message-ID: <002101c2b941$bd19c270$e205050a@mahindrabt.com> From: "Girish Pujari" To: Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:49:11 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2B96F.D6B50090" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Subject: [Policy] QoS Service Class usage in policy rules Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2B96F.D6B50090 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am refereing to the device-info draft = (draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model-08.txt) have following querries regarding the usage of QoSService class. 1. The QoSService can be used for representing the service classes like = Gold/Silver. Now how this can be related to the PolicyGroup. Example : User Bob has goldservice. 2. How the QoSSubService related to PolicyCondition and PolicyAction = classes. If we use diffserv then can we give the Condition with classifierID and = Action with Marker/Dropper/Scheduler ID ? Thanx Regards Girish Pujari ********************************************************* Disclaimer This message (including any attachments) contains=20 confidential information intended for a specific=20 individual and purpose, and is protected by law.=20 If you are not the intended recipient, you should=20 delete this message and are hereby notified that=20 any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it,=20 is strictly prohibited. ********************************************************* Visit us at http://www.mahindrabt.com ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2B96F.D6B50090 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am refereing to the device-info = draft=20 (draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model-08.txt)
have following querries regarding the = usage of=20 QoSService class.
 
1. The QoSService can be used for = representing the service classes  like=20 Gold/Silver.
Now how this can be related to the=20 PolicyGroup.
Example : User Bob has = goldservice.
 
2. How the QoSSubService related to = PolicyCondition=20 and PolicyAction classes.
If we use diffserv then can we give the = Condition=20 with classifierID and Action with Marker/Dropper/Scheduler ID = ?
 
 
 
Thanx
Regards
 
Girish=20 Pujari

*********************************************************
Disclaimer

This message (including any attachments) contains
confidential information intended for a specific
individual and purpose, and is protected by law.
If you are not the intended recipient, you should
delete this message and are hereby notified that
any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this
message, or the taking of any action based on it,
is strictly prohibited.

*********************************************************
Visit us at http://www.mahindrabt.com

------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2B96F.D6B50090-- _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 18 12:32:00 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA28852 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:32:00 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0IHmBY02705 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:48:11 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0IHh3J02582; Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:43:03 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0HI9iJ18932 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:09:44 -0500 Received: from gamma.isi.edu (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29836; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:53:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from ISI.EDU (jet.isi.edu [128.9.160.87]) by gamma.isi.edu (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h0HHusD24084; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:56:54 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200301171756.h0HHusD24084@gamma.isi.edu> To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, policy@ietf.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary=NextPart Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:56:54 -0800 Subject: [Policy] RFC 3460 on Policy Core Information Model (PCIM) Extensions Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --NextPart A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 3460 Title: Policy Core Information Model (PCIM) Extensions Author(s): B. Moore, Ed. Status: Standards Track Date: January 2003 Mailbox: remoore@us.ibm.com Pages: 93 Characters: 212453 Updates: 3060 I-D Tag: draft-ietf-policy-pcim-ext-08.txt URL: ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3460.txt This document specifies a number of changes to the Policy Core Information Model (PCIM, RFC 3060). Two types of changes are included. First, several completely new elements are introduced, for example, classes for header filtering, that extend PCIM into areas that it did not previously cover. Second, there are cases where elements of PCIM (for example, policy rule priorities) are deprecated, and replacement elements are defined (in this case, priorities tied to associations that refer to policy rules). Both types of changes are done in such a way that, to the extent possible, interoperability with implementations of the original PCIM model is preserved. This document updates RFC 3060. This document is a product of the Policy Framework Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution.echo Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. Joyce K. Reynolds and Sandy Ginoza USC/Information Sciences Institute ... Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the RFCs. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="RFC-INFO@RFC-EDITOR.ORG" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <030117095503.RFC@RFC-EDITOR.ORG> RETRIEVE: rfc DOC-ID: rfc3460 --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="rfc3460.txt"; site="ftp.isi.edu"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="in-notes" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <030117095503.RFC@RFC-EDITOR.ORG> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 19 23:17:51 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA00981 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:17:51 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0K4YiK09129 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:34:44 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0K4TdJ09005; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:29:39 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0K4RBJ08956 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:27:11 -0500 Received: from EXECDSL.COM (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA00775 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:09:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from [66.95.38.74] (HELO JLaptop.stevecrocker.com) by EXECDSL.COM (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.3) with ESMTP id 4158450 for policy@ietf.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:13:13 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030119230734.027bdcd8@mail.stevecrocker.com> X-Sender: joel@stevecrocker.com@mail.stevecrocker.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:13:03 -0500 To: policy@ietf.org From: "Joel M. Halpern" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Policy] Working Group Direction Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , After my note about needing volunteers to work on the LDAP mappings for PCIMe and QPIM, I received 3 volunteers for PCIMe mapping 1 volunteer for QPIM mapping and no mail from anyone else indicating that they even thought this was important. I would really like to see us actually complete our work. However, without more of a working group that is participating, Ed and I will have no choice but to request that the AD close the group. So, if you are willing to work on either or both of these two documents, please let me or the working group know. If you do not have time to be an author, but will be willing and able to actually read the documents and give us feedback, let us know. (Note that two of the three PCIMe volunteers are the only two folks I have actually noticed in the working group who have been reading and commenting on drafts when they are not on one of the author teams. I hope that there are other folks.) So, in summary, we need more authors and we need more participants. Yours, Joel M. Halpern _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 20 10:40:27 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA22097 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:40:27 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0KFvXj27380 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:57:33 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0KFraJ27188; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:53:38 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0KFqkJ27152 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:52:46 -0500 Received: from srvmaddog.metasolv.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA22021 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:35:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail.metasolv.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:40:14 -0600 Message-ID: From: "Pana, Mircea" To: "'Joel M. Halpern'" , policy@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Policy] Working Group Direction Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:35:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2C099.9CA0FA40" Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C099.9CA0FA40 Content-Type: text/plain I suggest that we take them one at a time. Let's get the PCIMe Schema I-D on its way. I vote in favor of continuing this work to completion. Regards, Mircea. -----Original Message----- From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:joel@stevecrocker.com] Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 11:13 PM To: policy@ietf.org Subject: [Policy] Working Group Direction After my note about needing volunteers to work on the LDAP mappings for PCIMe and QPIM, I received 3 volunteers for PCIMe mapping 1 volunteer for QPIM mapping and no mail from anyone else indicating that they even thought this was important. I would really like to see us actually complete our work. However, without more of a working group that is participating, Ed and I will have no choice but to request that the AD close the group. So, if you are willing to work on either or both of these two documents, please let me or the working group know. If you do not have time to be an author, but will be willing and able to actually read the documents and give us feedback, let us know. (Note that two of the three PCIMe volunteers are the only two folks I have actually noticed in the working group who have been reading and commenting on drafts when they are not on one of the author teams. I hope that there are other folks.) So, in summary, we need more authors and we need more participants. Yours, Joel M. Halpern _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C099.9CA0FA40 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [Policy] Working Group Direction

I suggest that we take them one at a time. Let's get = the PCIMe Schema I-D on its way. I vote in favor of continuing this = work to completion.

Regards,
Mircea.



-----Original Message-----
From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:joel@stevecrocker.com]<= /FONT>
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 11:13 PM
To: policy@ietf.org
Subject: [Policy] Working Group Direction


After my note about needing volunteers to work on the = LDAP mappings for
PCIMe and QPIM, I received

3 volunteers for PCIMe mapping
1 volunteer for QPIM mapping

and no mail from anyone else indicating that they = even thought this was
important.
I would really like to see us actually complete our = work.
However, without more of a working group that is = participating, Ed and I
will have no choice but to request that the AD close = the group.

So, if you are willing to work on either or both of = these two documents,
please let me or the working group know.
If you do not have time to be an author, but will be = willing and able to
actually read the documents and give us feedback, = let us know.  (Note that
two of the three PCIMe volunteers are the only two = folks I have actually
noticed in the working group who have been reading = and commenting on drafts
when they are not on one of the author teams.  = I hope that there are other
folks.)

So, in summary, we need more authors and we need more = participants.

Yours,
Joel M. Halpern


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

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C099.9CA0FA40-- _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 21 04:51:35 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA24640 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 04:51:35 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0LA93D03923 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 05:09:03 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0LA5LJ03129; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 05:05:23 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0LA32J03037 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 05:03:02 -0500 Received: from shardagate.mahindrabt.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA24561 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 04:45:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from thisdomain (mailscan.sharda.mahindrabt.com [10.5.0.97]) by shardagate.mahindrabt.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id PAA15007 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:18:16 +0530 Received: from intranet.sharda.mahindrabt.com by mahindrabt.com ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:07:15 +0530 Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:07:15 +0530 X-Originating-IP: 10.5.0.15 X-Auth-User: pujarig@mahindrabt.com Received: from pujarig ([10.5.5.226]) by intranet.sharda.mahindrabt.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA22048 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:18:10 +0530 Message-ID: <00ef01c2c133$be498fa0$e205050a@mahindrabt.com> From: "Girish Pujari" To: Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:29:09 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00EC_01C2C161.D7EC6EE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Subject: [Policy] Querry regarding MarkerService in QDDIM Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00EC_01C2C161.D7EC6EE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We are refering to the class MarkerService [QDDIM] in the=20 document . We are unable to associate the MarkerService with its type. We feel that a property MarkerServiceType needs to be added to=20 MarkerService Class with enumerations for the following 1. PreambleMarkerService 2. ToSMarkerService 3. DSCPMarkerService 4. 8021QMarkerService Does any association will relate these classes ?=20 The DropperService has properties DropperType, OtherDropperType, = DropFrom. Can MarkerService class also have similar properties ?.=20 Kindly inform,if there is any latest draft on this.=20 Thanx Regards Girish Pujari Mahindra British Telecom Pune - INDIA ********************************************************* Disclaimer This message (including any attachments) contains=20 confidential information intended for a specific=20 individual and purpose, and is protected by law.=20 If you are not the intended recipient, you should=20 delete this message and are hereby notified that=20 any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it,=20 is strictly prohibited. ********************************************************* Visit us at http://www.mahindrabt.com ------=_NextPart_000_00EC_01C2C161.D7EC6EE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
We are refering to the class=20 MarkerService [QDDIM]  in the 
document =20 <draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model-08.txt>.
 
We are unable to associate the = MarkerService with=20 its type.
 
We feel that a property = MarkerServiceType needs to=20 be added to
MarkerService Class with enumerations = for the=20 following
 
1. PreambleMarkerService
2. ToSMarkerService
3. DSCPMarkerService
4. 8021QMarkerService
 
Does any association will = relate these classes=20 ? 
 
 
The DropperService has properties = DropperType,=20 OtherDropperType, DropFrom.
Can MarkerService class also = have=20 similar properties ?. 
 
 
Kindly inform,if there is any latest = draft on this.=20
 
Thanx
Regards
 
Girish Pujari
Mahindra British Telecom
Pune - INDIA
 

*********************************************************
Disclaimer

This message (including any attachments) contains
confidential information intended for a specific
individual and purpose, and is protected by law.
If you are not the intended recipient, you should
delete this message and are hereby notified that
any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this
message, or the taking of any action based on it,
is strictly prohibited.

*********************************************************
Visit us at http://www.mahindrabt.com

------=_NextPart_000_00EC_01C2C161.D7EC6EE0-- _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 29 02:23:27 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA08057 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:23:27 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0T7ilS02540 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:44:47 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0T7f5J02454; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:41:05 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0T7ejJ02422 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:40:45 -0500 Received: from sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA02119 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:18:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com [171.71.163.14]) by sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0T7MHB6011337; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:22:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from CSCOAMERA18391 (andreaw-frame1.cisco.com [10.19.253.186]) by mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.1-GA) with ESMTP id ADR29195; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:18:42 -0800 (PST) From: "Andrea Westerinen" To: "'Girish Pujari'" , Subject: RE: [Policy] Querry regarding MarkerService in QDDIM Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:22:20 -0800 Message-ID: <00a501c2c767$291a8d00$bafd130a@amer.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00A6_01C2C724.1AF74D00" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 In-Reply-To: <00ef01c2c133$be498fa0$e205050a@mahindrabt.com> Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00A6_01C2C724.1AF74D00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Girish, A "type" property is not defined on the MarkerService class, since it is necessary to instantiate a subclass in all cases, in order to define the appropriate data. The text for the class reads: "MarkerService is a concrete class because its superclass (ConditioningService) is concrete. While this class can be instantiated, an instance of it does not accomplish anything, because both the field to be marked and the value used to mark it are defined in subclasses." Andrea -----Original Message----- From: policy-admin@ietf.org [mailto:policy-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Girish Pujari Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 1:37 AM To: policy@ietf.org Subject: [Policy] Querry regarding MarkerService in QDDIM We are refering to the class MarkerService [QDDIM] in the document . We are unable to associate the MarkerService with its type. We feel that a property MarkerServiceType needs to be added to MarkerService Class with enumerations for the following 1. PreambleMarkerService 2. ToSMarkerService 3. DSCPMarkerService 4. 8021QMarkerService Does any association will relate these classes ? The DropperService has properties DropperType, OtherDropperType, DropFrom. Can MarkerService class also have similar properties ?. Kindly inform,if there is any latest draft on this. Thanx Regards Girish Pujari Mahindra British Telecom Pune - INDIA ********************************************************* Disclaimer This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. ********************************************************* Visit us at http://www.mahindrabt.com ------=_NextPart_000_00A6_01C2C724.1AF74D00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Girish, A "type" property is not defined on the MarkerService = class,=20 since it is necessary to instantiate a subclass in all cases, in = order to=20 define the appropriate data.  The text for the class=20 reads:

"MarkerService is a concrete class because its = superclass=20 (ConditioningService) is concrete. While this class can be instantiated, = an=20 instance of it does not accomplish anything, because both the field to = be marked=20 and the value used to mark it are defined in subclasses."

Andrea =

-----Original = Message-----
From:=20 policy-admin@ietf.org [mailto:policy-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Girish=20 Pujari
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 1:37 AM
To:=20 policy@ietf.org
Subject: [Policy] Querry regarding = MarkerService in=20 QDDIM

We are refering to the class=20 MarkerService [QDDIM]  in the 
document =20 <draft-ietf-policy-qos-device-info-model-08.txt>.
 
We are unable to associate the = MarkerService with=20 its type.
 
We feel that a property = MarkerServiceType needs to=20 be added to
MarkerService Class with enumerations = for the=20 following
 
1. PreambleMarkerService
2. ToSMarkerService
3. DSCPMarkerService
4. 8021QMarkerService
 
Does any association will = relate these classes=20 ? 
 
 
The DropperService has properties = DropperType,=20 OtherDropperType, DropFrom.
Can MarkerService class also = have=20 similar properties ?. 
 
 
Kindly inform,if there is any latest = draft on this.=20
 
Thanx
Regards
 
Girish Pujari
Mahindra British Telecom
Pune - INDIA
 

*****************************************= ****************
Disclaimer

This=20 message (including any attachments) contains
confidential = information=20 intended for a specific
individual and purpose, and is protected by = law.=20
If you are not the intended recipient, you should
delete this = message=20 and are hereby notified that
any disclosure, copying, or = distribution of=20 this
message, or the taking of any action based on it,
is = strictly=20 prohibited.

******************************************************= ***
Visit=20 us at http://www.mahindrabt.com

------=_NextPart_000_00A6_01C2C724.1AF74D00-- _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 29 02:25:19 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA10099 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:25:19 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0T7kdC02610 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:46:39 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0T7dTJ02345; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:39:29 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0T7b9J01801 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:37:09 -0500 Received: from sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA28304 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:15:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com [171.71.163.14]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0T7Iisv019218; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:18:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from CSCOAMERA18391 (andreaw-frame1.cisco.com [10.19.253.186]) by mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.1-GA) with ESMTP id ADR28963; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:15:11 -0800 (PST) From: "Andrea Westerinen" To: "'Pana, Mircea'" , "'IETF Policy \(E-mail\)'" Subject: RE: [Policy] PCIMe: the aggregation ContainedDomain Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:18:48 -0800 Message-ID: <00a001c2c766$ab367660$bafd130a@amer.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00A1_01C2C723.9D133660" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 In-Reply-To: Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Policy Framework List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00A1_01C2C723.9D133660 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I did not see a reply - so I am taking a stab at this.... ContainedDomain is a general association indicating that administrative domains may be aggregated by multiple, other, "larger" domains. For example, the "East Coast" domain could aggregate all "state" domains east of the Mississippi. And, the "Democratic" domain could aggregate all "state" domains that voted Democratic in the last election (sorry, a very contrived example). Similarly for policy containers, reusable containers could be multiply aggregated into other "larger" containers, that are defined with different semantics but that have overlapping members. Andrea -----Original Message----- From: policy-admin@ietf.org [mailto:policy-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pana, Mircea Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 7:00 AM To: IETF Policy (E-mail) Subject: [Policy] PCIMe: the aggregation ContainedDomain The aggregation ContainedDomain includes: "GroupComponent[ref AdminDomain [0..n]]" IMO the cardinality should be "0..1" instead of "0...n". In other words: A ReusablePolicyContainer can contain zero or more ReusablePolicyContainer instances. A ReusablePolicyContainer can be a root-level container (for the context) or it can be contained by one single other ReusablePolicyContainer. Regards, Mircea. ------=_NextPart_000_00A1_01C2C723.9D133660 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
I did=20 not see a reply - so I am taking a stab at this....
 
ContainedDomain is a general association indicating that = administrative=20 domains may be aggregated by multiple, other, "larger" domains.  = For=20 example, the "East Coast" domain could aggregate all "state" domains = east of the=20 Mississippi.  And, the "Democratic" domain could aggregate all = "state"=20 domains that voted Democratic in the last election (sorry, a very = contrived=20 example).  Similarly for policy containers, reusable containers = could be=20 multiply aggregated into other "larger" containers, that are = defined with=20 different semantics but that have overlapping = members.
 
Andrea
 
-----Original Message-----
From: = policy-admin@ietf.org=20 [mailto:policy-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pana, = Mircea
Sent:=20 Thursday, January 09, 2003 7:00 AM
To: IETF Policy=20 (E-mail)
Subject: [Policy] PCIMe: the aggregation=20 ContainedDomain

The aggregation ContainedDomain = includes:=20
"GroupComponent[ref AdminDomain = [0..n]]"=20
IMO the cardinality should be = "0..1"=20 instead of "0...n". In other words: A ReusablePolicyContainer can = contain zero=20 or more  ReusablePolicyContainer instances. A = ReusablePolicyContainer can=20 be a root-level container (for the context) or it can be contained by = one single=20 other ReusablePolicyContainer.

Regards,
Mircea.

------=_NextPart_000_00A1_01C2C723.9D133660-- _______________________________________________ Policy mailing list Policy@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy