Subject: questions on draft-snir-qos-policy-schema-01.txt

From: "Kei Kato" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 12:09:52 +0900

Hi,
I have another minor questions regarding  QoS Policy Framework Information
Model

1) according to page 9 of this draft, qosPolicyRootClass  is derived
   from PolicyGroup, whereas
   we find in page 41, it is derived from Policy Class. Which one is
correct?

2) in page 11 , qosPolicyRepository is derived from Policy class, whereas
    in page 42, it is from AdminDomain.

3) in section 2.2.3.1 it says"  Whenever an auxiliary class should be
instantiated so
    that it can be reused, it will be attached to a PolicyInstance object "
    but PolicyInstance object doesn't exist in the draft Policy Framework
Core
    Information Model. There does exist policyConditionInstance and
policyActionInstance
    but the relationship between them and PolicyInstance is not clear.

thank you in advance.

--
Kei Kato
Network Systems Business Group        Oki Electric Industry
Phone: +81-43-296-2211(Ex.4427)  Fax: +81-43-296-2369

---

From: "Yoram Snir" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 14:57:18 -0800

Please see comments inline.

Yoram Snir
Tel. 972-9-9700085
mailto:\\[email-masked]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Kei Kato
> Sent: Monday, November 29, 1999 7:10 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: questions on draft-snir-qos-policy-schema-01.txt
>
>
> Hi,

(You must be referring to "qosPolicyRoot".)
You're absolutely right. This will be fixed.

>     in page 42, it is from AdminDomain.

Right, this typo is the result of us trying to be as compliant as possible
with the lates Core Policy draft. In the last IETF meeting, a deciision was
made that the repository class will move from the qos draft to the core
draft. The next version will not include this class but the Core policy
draft will.

>     but the relationship between them and PolicyInstance is not clear.

The lastest Core schema replaced the general PolicyInstance with specialized
policyConditionInstance and policyActionInstance. This is lacking since
reusable objects are not necessarily action and conditions. This will need
to be fixed.

> thank you in advance.

Thank you.

---

From: "Kei Kato" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 10:24:12 +0900

Right. There should be a class( like PolicyInstance ) from which
policyConditionInstance and policyActionInstance are derived
 so that another class can be
defined other than action and condition.

---

From: "Kei Kato" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 10:04:27 +0900

> You're absolutely right. This will be fixed.

So PolicyGroup is the right one?

> draft. The next version will not include this class but the Core policy

current core draft (info-model-02) shows PolicyReopository is derived from
AdminDomain. So this will be correct?

Thank you

Kei