RE: AW: Any resolution to the QSPEC mandatory parameter li st?

Hannes:

You might be right to some extent as there are so many documents and each
has many things inside it.

Yes, the works are contribution driven based on its charter.

The basic point, if I understand you correctly, QOS model in NSIS is under
development for QOS signaling as we have been seeing some discussions are
going on.

What we are seeing here is this: There is a "gap" how to use the NSIS QOS
model by the application like SIP. As you have said that the application
will request QOS using NSIS QOS model. The application like SIP has to
convert the e2e QOS needs per non-e2e NSIS QOS model. 

How the application like SIP will do it is not known - it is a
"non-standard" scheme, and NSIS also does not want to address this as no one
has brought contributions along this line.

If it is true, let us make it is clear as objectives because no documents
address this keeping this in disguise as if some miracle happens.

That is point that I have been driving at for "complexity" of QOS parameter
discussions that you have trying hard for mapping between NSIS QOS
parameters to WiFi, WiMAX, cellular, IP, etc.

Once we know this, we can easily fall back to the same schemes what other
like DIAMETER are doing.

Did I summarize correctly? I appreciate your patience.

BR/Radhika

  _____  

From: nsis-bounces <at> ietf.org on behalf of Hannes Tschofenig
Sent: Tue 8/1/2006 6:07 AM
To: Roy, Radhika R.
Cc: nsis <at> ietf.org; Hancock, Robert
Subject: Re: AW: [NSIS] Any resolution to the QSPEC mandatory parameter li
st?

Roy,

to me it seems that you haven't read the existing NSIS documents.
I strongly suggest that you should do that. You cannot put the workload
on me to summarize the documents for you. Since the IETF is contribution
driven I think you should also work on a draft that describes what you
want. You might, for example, develop the QoS model. It is easy to
criticize the work of others if you haven't written your own proposal.

Ciao
Hannes