Subject: RE: [midcom] Protocol Eval: 2.2.3 Ruleset Groups - COPS

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

Hi Martin,

I don't understand your point, as the COPS description for 2.2.3 suggests
the use of the HANDLE STATE.  My understanding is that this is something
already defined for COPS. So, I propose to leave this one as it is.

Mary. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Stiemerling [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 7:23 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [midcom] Protocol Eval: 2.2.3 Ruleset Groups

- COPS
The MIDCOM grouping functionality can be build via a particular PIP 
defintion. The same is possible with SNMP, but SNMP got only a 'P+'.
I.e. COPS should get 'P+' as well.

-- 
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 12:05:18 +0200

> I don't understand your point, as the COPS description for 2.2.3 suggests

Sorry for being so unspecific. Here is a more detailed description of 
the problem:
The COPS RFC says, that handle states can be installed from the PEP at 
the PDP. This means that the middlebox can install groups and tell this 
the agent. But the agent can not influence the generation and deletion 
of groups at all, i.e. the agent depends fully on the "grace" of the 
middlebox.
I don't know if an agent will be able to request groups on its own with 
an appropriate PIP defintion.

-- 
Martin Stiemerling