Policy Framework (policy) Concluded WG
Note: The data for concluded WGs is occasionally incorrect.
|Area||Operations and Management Area (ops)|
|Dependencies||Document dependency graph (SVG)|
Charter for Working Group
Note: Russ Mundy <firstname.lastname@example.org> is the Security Technical
advisor for this WG.
There is a need to represent, manage, share, and reuse policies
and policy information in a vendor-independent, interoperable,
and scalable manner. This working group has three main goals.
First, to provide a framework that will meet these needs. Second,
to define an extensible information model and specific schemata
compliant with that framework that can be used for general policy
representation (called the core information model and schema).
For now, only a directory schema will be defined. Third, to
extend the core information model and schema to address the needs of
QoS traffic management (called the QoS information model and
The viability of the framework will be proven by demonstrating
that high-level policy information can be translated into device
configuration information for network QoS applications. This
requires the coordination of the core and QoS schemata, the
PIB and MIB being developed in DiffServ, and possibly
extensions to COPS provisioning, which is being developed
in RAP. A secondary goal of this framework is to show that this
general development process can be extended to other
The objectives of this working group are to:
1. Identify a set of representative use cases to guide us in
defining a policy framework, information model, and schemata
to store, retrieve, distribute and process policies. These use
cases should map to a set of policy rules, and aid us in defining
the composition of policies.
2. Define a framework for intra-domain policy definition and
administration for a heterogeneous set of Policy Decision and
Enforcement Points. Here, "intra-domain" refers to policy
components that are all under the same (and exclusive)
administrative control. The framework will be shown to be able
to be used to represent, distribute, and manage policies and
policy information in an unambiguous, interoperable manner in
a single administrative domain. This framework will be applied
to network QoS.
3. A general information model, derived from the CIM/DEN
policy model, will be produced. This is intended to serve as a
generic means for representing policies and policy information.
In addition, a mapping of this information model to a form that
can be implemented in a directory that uses LDAPv3 as its
access protocol will also be done.
4. Refinements to the above, for representing signaled and
provisioned QoS, will be done. That is, both the information
model as well as the schema will be extended to focus on
network QoS. This will also be used to prove the general
extensibility of the model.
5. A key part of demonstrating that this model can provide
end-to-end translation of high-level policy specifications to
device configurations is to ensure that the information
model and schemata are compatible with and can use the
information contained in the PIB(s) and MIB(s) being
developed in the Differentiated Services WG. To this end,
the Policy Framework WG will supply input to the
development of the PIBs, and include all applicable PIBs
and MIBs in its development considerations for the
framework, information model, and schemata.
6. Policy information may be communicated using several
protocols. The COPS protocol, being developed in the RAP
WG, is an example of one such protocol. The Policy
Framework WG will work with the RAP WG to define usage
directives for use of the COPS base protocol to support
policy information exchange transactions within the
framework being standardized in the Policy Framework WG.
7. The Policy Framework WG will work closely with the
IPSP WG to ensure that the IPsec data model fits and can
be supported within the general framework defined by the
Policy Framework WG.
8. The Policy Framework WG will work with other WGs as
needed to ensure that the framework, information model,
and specific schemata produced meet the needs of these
9. The charter specifically excludes:
-schema attributes or classes that are vendor-specific
(although the schema defined in this group will be defined
in a way that is extensible by specific vendors)
|Aug 2001||QPLS Final Draft, and wg last call|
|Done||QDDIM Final Draft and wg last call|
|Done||QPIM Final Draft, and wg last call|
|Done||PCIM Extensions Final Draft, and wg last call|
|Done||Terminology draft wg last call (fyi track)|
|Done||PCLS working group last call|
|Done||PCIM submittal for Proposed Std Status|