RE: FW: POLTERM Outline Rough Draft

["Andrea Westerinen" <andreawest@mindspring.com>]

My issue is that the current list of proposed words is sufficient.  What I
want to see are the definitions themselves.  From the definitions, other
issues/words/discussions may arise.

I don't want to add words right now - I want to use the listed words
consistently.  For this, I need definitions.

Andrea

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francis Reichmeyer -NJ [mailto:FranR@iphighway.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2000 10:24 AM
> To: 'Andrea Westerinen '; Francis Reichmeyer -NJ; 'polterm@ops.ietf.org
> '
> Cc: 'jstrassn@cisco.com '; 'dan@noah.dma.isg.mot.com ';
> 'mcondell@bbn.com '; 'randy@psg.com '; 'johns@cisco.com '; ''Bert
> Wijnen' '; 'markstevens@lucent.com '
> Subject: RE: FW: POLTERM Outline Rough Draft
>
>
> Andrea,
>
> What was sent out was just an outline... there will be (hopefully
> in time) a document behind it containing definitions for the list
> of terms. It may be unconventional to send out an outline in
> advance of a draft, but we were asked to do this by the co-AD
> running the POLTERM bof session.
>
> Our original task/goal was to make some sense of existing terms in
> existing policy drafts, gather them in one place, and try to resolve
> conflicts where seen. This is a very big job to do for all of policy.
> We started with what was discussed in the last POLTERM bof, addressing
> the existing terms. We tried not to create new terms, when we could
> avoid it, thinking it might add to the confusion.
>
> What more would you like to see in the Terminology draft? This
> is exactly the kind of input the DT is looking for. If you could
> provide specific examples, we'd appreciate it as it would help us
> figure out where the draft is going.
>
> Thanks,
> -Fran
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrea Westerinen
> To: Francis Reichmeyer -NJ; polterm@ops.ietf.org
> Cc: jstrassn@cisco.com; dan@noah.dma.isg.mot.com; mcondell@bbn.com;
> randy@psg.com; johns@cisco.com; 'Bert Wijnen'; markstevens@lucent.com
> Sent: 03/08/2000 3:08 AM
> Subject: RE: FW: POLTERM Outline Rough Draft
>
> Fran, I am very disappointed in this.  Given that many months and many
> emails have passed, there is little more to review here than was
> originally
> discussed in the Policy teams and the various other Internet-Drafts.
>
> I care less that you have a complete set of terms than that we have the
> terms defined.
>
> Andrea
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-polterm@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-polterm@ops.ietf.org]On
> > Behalf Of Francis Reichmeyer -NJ
> > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 10:05 AM
> > To: 'polterm@ops.ietf.org'
> > Cc: jstrassn@cisco.com; dan@noah.dma.isg.mot.com; mcondell@bbn.com;
> > randy@psg.com; johns@cisco.com; 'Bert Wijnen'; Francis Reichmeyer -NJ;
> > 'markstevens@lucent.com'
> > Subject: RE: FW: POLTERM Outline Rough Draft
> >
> >
> > The design team working on the policy terminology draft, originally
> > discussed in the POLTERM BOF at the last IETF, received a request to
> > send out the outline for the next revision of the draft. Here it is.
> > Please send comments/questions/concerns/etc. to the list. Do people
> > feel the terms included sufficiently cover the needs of the various
> > WGs working on policy? What term, if any, are missing, or shouldn't
> > be here?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Fran (and the rest of the DT)
> >
> >
> > A common terminology for policy management
> >
> > 1 Introduction
> > 2 Terms for Describing Approaches to Policy
> > 2.1 Policy (What is a Policy?)
> > 2.1.1 Policy Representation in the Policy Framework WG
> > 2.2 Policy Management Area
> > 2.3 Policy Domain
> > 2.4 Implementing Policy
> > 2.4.1 Introduction
> > 2.4.2 Definition
> > 2.5 Meta-policy
> > 2.5.1 Introduction
> > 2.5.2 Definition
> > 3 Terms describing Policy-based Network Management Models
> > 3.1 Introduction
> > 3.2 Outsourced Policy
> > 3.3 Provisioned Policy
> > 3.4 Interactive Policy
> > 4 Policy Abstraction and Scoping
> > 4.1 Introduction
> > 4.2 Levels of abstraction
> > 4.2.1 Administrator-defined policy
> > 4.2.2 Device-independent policy
> > 4.2.3 Device-dependent policy
> > 4.3 Scoping with Roles and Contexts
> > 4.3.1 Scoping with Levels of Abstraction
> > 5 Terms Concerning Modeling and Representation of Policy
> > 5.1 Introduction
> > 5.2 Information Model
> > 5.3 Data Model
> > 5.4 Schema
> > 5.5 Composition of policies
> > 5.5.1 Policy Group
> > 5.5.2 Policy Rule
> > 5.5.3 Policy Condition 5
> > .5.4 Policy Action
> > 5.6 Policy Metadata
> > 5.7 Policy Management
> > 6 Terms for Describing Policy Functions
> > 6.1 Introduction
> > 6.2 Policy Storage and Retrieval
> > 6.3 Policy Conversion
> > 6.4 Policy Discovery
> > 6.5 Policy Resolution
> > 6.6 Policy Translation
> > 6.7 Policy Control
> > 6.7.1 Introduction
> > 6.7.2 Policy Conflict
> > 6.7.3 Policy Conflict Resolution
> > 6.7.4 Policy Satisfiability
> > 6.7.5 Policy Feasibility
> > 6.8 Policy Administration
> > 6.9 Policy Decorreltation
> > 7 Terms for describing Functional Elements and Policy Topologies
> > 7.1 Introduction
> > 7.2 Policy Administrator
> > 7.3 Policy Repository
> > 7.4 Policy Consumer
> > 7.5 Policy Enforcement Point
> > 8 Terms Describing Interactions Between Policy Components
> > 8.1 Access Protocol(s)
> > 8.2 Policy Requests
> > 8.3 Policy Decisions
> > 8.4 Policy Evaluation
> > 8.5 Policy Enforcement
> > 8.6 Policy Monitoring
> > 8.7 Policy Feedback
> > 9 Terms describing specific policies
> > 9.1 Introduction
> > 9.2 Terms related to Service Levels
> > 9.2.1 Service Level Agreement (SLA)
> > 9.2.2 Service Level Specfication (SLS)
> > 9.3 Terms related to security policies
> > 10 Security Considerations
> > 11 References
> > 12 Author's Addresses
> > 13 Full Copyright Notice
> > 14 Acknowledgement
> >
>