RE: Deployment Review for Bandwidth Attributes Document

["Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)" <paul.congdon@hp.com>]

Bert,

The most recent comments in this thread are related to how 3GPP, Wi-Fi
and 802.11e have chosen to map the 802.1D/Q traffic classes to
applications (Discussed in Annex G of 802.1Q).  This is not what the
bandwidth draft is specifying and I haven't seen any evidence so far
that the draft is not on track to satisfy the original intent to allow
simple bandwidth allocations for 802.1 and 802.11 devices.

Paul 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 2:56 AM
> To: Bernard Aboba; Mick Seaman
> Cc: Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve); farooq.bari@cingular.com; 
> radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Deployment Review for Bandwidth Attributes Document
> 
> Bernard writes:
> > It sounds like there is a potential conflict between the intended 
> > usages of this document by various SDOs.
> > 
> 
> And so to me that sounds as a not-so-good-basis to try to converge
> and define a standard. But if you want it to become a stds track
> document, then it is absolutely necessary (in my view) to
> converge on exactly what needs to be specified and what the
> intended uses are.
> 
> Bert
> 

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>