Hello,
Can you please let me know where I can get this TEQUILA draft?
Regards
Vishwa
-----Original Message-----
From: Marcus Brunner [mailto:brunner@ccrle.nec.de]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 9:10 AM
To: sls@ist-tequila.org
Subject: Re: [tequila/sls] comments on the TEQUILA draft by W.
Almesberger
Dear all,
Yves, you stated in Pittsbourgh, that you want to go for a BOF. You
already asked for it?
If no we should start discussing, what the purpose/goal of the WG is.
With SLS document, which is I think very premature, it is not clear for
me what the target standard should be in the area of SLS and its
negotiation.
Some comments to Werner's
> 1.2, page 4, paragraph 4, "(template)"
> Is this really a template ? Or is rather a collection of
Would it be a good idea to model the SLS using CIM (as in the Policy
Framework, where the draft actually was very well placed by Bert W.)
>3.1, general.
> Typical SLAs in use today include geographic references like "no more
> than X ms RTT to any of our routers in Europe". Example:
> http://www.uk.uu.net/customerservices/sla/tandcs/
>
> Such specifications are probably too difficult to express in a general
> formal way, so the current approach of ignoring them seems appropriate.
> Nevertheless, it may be good to mention them, simply due to their
> current practical relevance.
I don't think that they are too difficult, but on an other level of
abstraction. (part of domain name? Some specific countries, regions etc.
>3.2, list, DSCP.
> Why is it only a single DSCP ? Also, is there only a single Flow ID
> per SLS, or can there be many ?
A set of DSCPs is definitly needed.
>3.2, list, page 6, Source information.
> This highlights some problems with the formality chosen: usually,
> "X" and "set of X" are distinguished. But here (and also for the
> destination), "set of source prefixed" only appears as a set.
I have problems with the exclusive OR for src & dest addresses.
>5. (and also bits of 1.2, etc.)
> The discussion on signaling appears premature and probably beyond
> the scope of a document specifying SLS parameters and semantics.
I think there should be a requirements draft for the negotiation anyway.
Marcus
Koch Berthold wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> on behalf of Werner Almesberger (EPFL) I'm sending his comments on the
> TEQUILA draft.
>
> Best Regards
>
> Bert
> <<C.C.txt>>
>
> -
> _____________________________________________________
> Bert F. Koch Siemens AG, ICN WN CS EK P
> Hofmannstr. 51 Voice: +49 89 722 22 465
> D-81359 Muenchen Fax: +49 89 722 41 920
> Germany Mail: Berthold.Koch@icn.siemens.de
> Internet:
http://www-st.inf.tu-dresden.de/aquila/
> _____________________________________________________
> More news on INTERWORKING'2000 at http://www.telenor.no/fou/iw2000/
> _____________________________________________________
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Name: C.C.txt
> C.C.txt Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
> Encoding: quoted-printable
--Dr. Marcus Brunner C&C Research Laboratories NEC Europe Ltd.
E-Mail: brunner@ccrle.nec.de WWW: http://www.ccrle.nec.de/ personal home page: http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/~brunner
Adenauerplatz 6 D-69115 Heidelberg Germany
Phone: +49 (0)6221/ 9051129 Fax: +49 (0)6221/ 9051155
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 13 2000 - 16:41:20 CEST