A Comparison of Policy Provisioning Protocols
draft-kzm-policy-protcomp-00
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Keith McCloghrie, Mike Fine | ||
| Last updated | 1999-10-27 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
The IETF's RAP Working Group has almost completed its task of defining COPS as a standards-track protocol for RSVP Admission Policy. The WG's charter is now being extended to cover standardizing a policy provisioning protocol, and the proposal put forward for consideration by the WG is based on defining a new Client-type for COPS. This new Client-type is intended to work in conjunction with the QoS Policy objects and schema definitions being defined in two other IETF Working Groups: Differentiated Services, and Policy. Before proceeding any further, it has been requested that a comparison be undertaken as to why COPS is better suited to this than a (modified if necessary) version of SNMP. This memo attempts to document such a comparison.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)