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

From: "Yoram Snir" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:38:02 -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: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 5:04 PM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: questions on draft-snir-qos-policy-schema-01.txt
>
>
> > >
> > > 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?
> >
> > (You must be referring to "qosPolicyRoot".)
> > You're absolutely right. This will be fixed.
>
> So PolicyGroup is the right one?
>

Yes, until we update the qos draft to the new core model draft.

> >
> > >
> > > 2) in page 11 , qosPolicyRepository is derived from Policy
> > > class, whereas
> > >     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.
>
> current core draft (info-model-02) shows PolicyReopository is
> derived from
> AdminDomain. So this will be correct?
Once we update the qos draft to the new info-model, the qosPolicyrepository
class will be removed and the Core PolicyRepository will be used. It will be
defined by the core, i.e., extends AdminDomain.
> Thank you
> Kei