Re: [Dcpel] Re: diffserv control plane

Kathie

Thanks for the feedback

I was just thinking about what I can gleen from the messages so far and 
thought of the old saying: why invent something new when something old 
would suffice.

I don't know if COPS will address your requirements, but was initially 
curious if it had been looked at, even if it needed some extensions to 
solve what you were looking for in the control plane.

The next thing I was thinking is that if COPS had been ruled out, why was 
it ruled out.

There likely are some perfectly valid reasons to rule COPS out, I was just 
wondering if the list was going to see that reasoning - and it sounds like 
we will.

I look forward to reading the ID(s).

At 10:15 AM 10/17/2005 -0700, Kathleen Nichols wrote:
>James M. Polk wrote:
> > Kathleen
> >
> > Can you give an overview of how something like COPS cannot do what you
> > are envisioning, with or without extension?
> >
>....
>James,
>I don't have anything to add to what Jeff Pulliam has said about this,
>but do want to reiterate that there is no intention to ignore COPS.
>The dcpel effort is for a BoF at present, a chance to discuss if
>something else is needed at the IETF, and an explicit goal is to
>see what related work is relevent even if something more is needed.
>I think you'll see in our draft that we've always thought of COPS
>as a possible option for use but not one we employed in a prototype.
>Hopefully, we'll get to see some ways that people are using COPS.
>
>         Kathie
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Dcpel mailing list
>Dcpel@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcpel

cheers,
James

                                 *******************
                 Truth is not to be argued... it is to be presented.

_______________________________________________
Dcpel mailing list
Dcpel@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcpel