Subject: RE: [midcom] Protocol Eval: 2.2.2 multiple Middlebox types - MEGA CO issue for 2.2.2 and 2.2.3

From: "Mary Barnes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 11:18:05 -0500

Hi Martin,

I agree that the SNMP should be a T; I think this was an editorial change
made to P+ when it only had the more general text.  When I added the
specific text for the last round of comments, it should have been "upgraded"
to T.  Thus, I'll also leave COPS as it is. 

I think I agree that MEGACO should be P+, but this should probably be
discussed further.  There is text (added in the -01 version as the result of
email discussion) with regards to the description of the context that the
concept of flow between terminations, which is inherent to the context model
is irrelevant, thus I would think this should be a P+ or even a P. But, I
would definitely like discussion of this on the list. Note, that if we make
this change to 2.2.2, then we probably need to make a similar change to
2.2.3 as it also suggests the use of contexts to meet this requirement. 

Mary.

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Stiemerling [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 7:21 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [midcom] Protocol Eval: 2.2.2 Support of multiple Middlebox
types

- SNMP:
SNMP is totally compliant 'T' since the sysObjectID is available.
- RSIP:
I agree
- MEGACO:
Should be 'P+' since the design of properties or terminations must be 
done, i.e. it can support this feature but it has to be defined.
- DIAMETER:
I agree
- COPS:
The meaning of "COPS allows a PDP to provide filters and actions to 
multiple PEP functions through a single COPS session." holds completely 
true for SNMP  as well. Additionally for SNMP the direct support 
described under SNMP is avaiable. My proposal: Either both 'P+' or 'T'.

-- 
Martin Stiemerling

NEC Europe Ltd. -- Network Laboratories  [email-masked]
IPv4: http://www.ccrle.nec.de  IPv6: http://www.ipv6.ccrle.nec.de

_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom

_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom

---

From: Martin Stiemerling <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:19:25 +0200

> to T.  Thus, I'll also leave COPS as it is. 

OK.

> 2.2.3 as it also suggests the use of contexts to meet this requirement. 

I see, you´re right with 2.2.3. Where are the MEGACO people for the 
discussion?

-- 
Martin Stiemerling