Hello Vishwa,
You can find it at the www.ist-tequila.org website if you click on the
"SLS interest" link which is on the left. There is a link to the draft at
the bottom of that page.
Regards,
Ilias
---------------------------------------------------
Dr Ilias Andrikopoulos
Research Fellow, Networks Research Group
Centre for Communication Systems Research (CCSR)
Univ. of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH, UK
Office: U44 / BA Building
Tel: +44 (0)1483 259495 Fax: +44 (0)1483 876011
Email: <i.andrikopoulos@eim.surrey.ac.uk>
<ilias@ieee.org>
WWW: <http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/CCSR/Networks>
---------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Rao, Viswanatha wrote:
>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 - 16:53:26 CEST