[Ieprep] Re: Discussion of Internet-Draft for SMTP priorities

John Rosenberg <jrrosenberg@lucent.com> Tue, 13 June 2006 14:15 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fq9fc-0000il-9Z; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:15:04 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fq9fb-0000ig-7M for ieprep@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:15:03 -0400
Received: from ihemail4.lucent.com ([135.245.0.39]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fq9fZ-0007Ql-Va for ieprep@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:15:03 -0400
Received: from ihmail.ih.lucent.com (h135-1-218-70.lucent.com [135.1.218.70]) by ihemail4.lucent.com (8.13.6/IER-o) with ESMTP id k5DEF1vr027685 for <ieprep@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:15:01 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from jrrosenberg-04.lucent.com (jrrosenberg-04.ih.lucent.com [135.185.233.167]) by ihmail.ih.lucent.com (8.11.7p1+Sun/EMS-1.5 sol2) id k5DEF1w23285; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:15:01 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20060613090916.0337b380@ihmail.ih.lucent.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:15:00 -0500
To: ieprep@ietf.org
From: John Rosenberg <jrrosenberg@lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <E1Fq0rp-00050F-Cz@megatron.ietf.org>
References: <E1Fq0rp-00050F-Cz@megatron.ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25
Subject: [Ieprep] Re: Discussion of Internet-Draft for SMTP priorities
X-BeenThere: ieprep@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Emergency Preparedness Working Group <ieprep.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ieprep@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ieprep-bounces@ietf.org

At 11:51 PM 6/12/2006, Janet Gunn wrote:

 >Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:07:22 -0400
 >From: Janet P Gunn <jgunn6@csc.com>
 >
 >Current implementations of  MLPP, eMLPP, WPS, and RPH use 0 to represent
 >the high priority group, with 1.2.3.4, etc representing successively lower
 >priorities.  What is the rationale for turning this upside down and using 0
 >to represent "non-priority"?

The current DISA specification for MLPP on VoIP networks specifies RPH 
r-priority values of 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9 in ascending order of priority (e.g. 
0 = Routine and 9 = F-O-O).

John Rosenberg


_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
Ieprep@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep