Re: [Int-area] New Version Notification for draft-eckert-intarea-flow-metadata-framework-01.txt

Brian,

Let me give you a comparison: I think DNS is a system with
a standardized data-model for information about specific objects,
primarily hosts and services. The result/action from using DNS is
most commonly some TCP connection(s). That does not make DNS a
TSV target. The metadata framework is in my eyes about a system
with a standardized data-model for traffic-flows and the result/action
is most commonly some form of QoS for the traffic flows. Go figure.

Having said this, we asked to preesent in TSVWG as well, but it does 
not seem as if it would get onto the TSVWG WG agenda. I think there 
would be good collaborators to be found from TSV because like DNS
i would expect that the folks interested in the actions taken
have an interest to build a data-model to make their actions easier.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:20:40AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 19/07/2013 09:41, Reinaldo Penno (repenno) wrote:
> > Hi Brian,
> > 
> > Metadata has many uses and not just QoS.
> 
> Sure, but some of them clearly concern layers above 3.
> 
> > 
> > Therefore we believe int-area to be appropriate. What are your thoughts?
> 
> I think this is a case where early discussion in TSVWG would avoid
> problems later. In the end the choice of WG doesn't matter as long as
> cross-area issues are caught as soon as possible.
> 
>    Brian
> 
> > On 7/18/13 4:58 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> >> Why is this an intarea topic? To my mind it fits in tsvwg, which is
> >> currently discussing things like QoS for rtcweb.
> >>
> > 
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area