Subject: [Diffserv] Diffserv PIB

From: Christophe Doiteaux <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:34:15 +0200

Hi,

I am new in this working group and I would like to understand the Diffserv PIB. 

I read in the document (draft-ietf-diffserv-pib-01.txt)that the "Interface Type Capability Tables" may be associated with an interface of a specific type. Ok, but I don't see in any of the three tables a 'link' to assign capabilities to an interface type. What is the mechanism ?

Thanks for your response.

- Christophe

<color><param>0000,8080,8080</param>_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

_/ Christophe Doiteaux						_/

_/ Alcatel CIT - Corporate Research Center			_/

_/ Software & Services						_/

_/ Route de Nozay   		  |Phone: +33 (0)1 69-63-15-66	_/

_/ F-91461 Marcoussis Cedex	  |Fax: +33 (0)1 69-63-11-69	_/

_/ mailto:[email-masked]			_/

</color><color><param>0000,8080,8080</param>_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/</color>

_______________________________________________
diffserv mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
Archive: http://www-nrg.ee.lbl.gov/diff-serv-arch/

---

From: Sven Ooghe <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 17:26:26 +0200

Hi,

recently, I read the "draft-ietf-diffserv-pib-01.txt", and I have a
question about it.

In the "qosIfQueueTable" PRC, the attribute "qosIfQueueServiceDisc"
states that this attribute must have the same value for all queues
within the same priority group. Improper values could thus lead to
errors.

Couldn't you solve this problem by removing this attribute from this
PRC, and by introducing a new PRC with 3 attributes:
- qosIfQueueSetId
- qosIfQueuePriorityGroup
- qosIfQueueServiceDisc

So in this new class, each <queue set, priority group> pair (which
uniquely defines a subset of queues within the set) would then be
assigned a specified service discipline.

Is this correct?

Thanks in advance,

Sven Ooghe
Research engineer
Alcatel Bell
Belgium
phone: +32 3 240 42 26

---

From: "Michael Fine" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 18:22:02 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)

Yes, your suggestion would remove the potential for
mis-configuration and it is a cleaner specification.