Policy Framework WG (policy) Monday, November 8 at 1530-1730 Tuesday, November 9 at 0900-1130 ================================ CHAIRS: John Strassner Ed Ellesson AGENDA: MONDAY, November 8, 1999 Time: 1530-1730 Afternoon Sessions II Room: Regency Ballroom (10) Agenda Bashing Ellesson and Strassner (10) Status Ellesson and Strassner (45) Policy Requirements Mahon, et. al. (45) Policy Framework Stevens, et. al. TUESDAY, November 9, 1999 0900-1130 Morning Sessions Room: Regency (5) Agenda review Ellesson and Strassner (30) Core Info Model Moore, et. al. (30) LDAP Schema Moore, et. al. (45) QoS Policy Model Snir, et. al. (30) Device QoS Model Weiss, et. al. Minutes from meeting: Enclosed are the short minutes for the meeting of the Policy Framework WG for the 46th IETF. This WG met Monday and Tuesday, November 8 and 9. Minutes were taken by John Strassner. We are behind in several of the projected dates for completing drafts. This is a result of several complementary problems: 1) getting everyone up to speed on modeling complexities, especially w.r.t. LDAP implementations 2) working with multiple other groups to ensure that the framework developed in this working group can be used by other working groups 3) a recent set of disagreements over common terminology to be used across working groups 4) delays caused in ensuring that this framework would work across multiple directory server implementations We have made progress in each of these areas, and there are now implementations of parts of these drafts on multiple directories. We have revised the two core drafts (information model and LDAP mapping). The core draft is ow very stable - the major open issue is what additional items that are being developed in the QoS drafts ca be moved into the core drafts. The chairs took an action item to lead this resolution and to try and get convergence within the next month. Both QoS drafts were updated, though the low-level QoS draft missed the cutoff date (and since this happened, more time is being taken to add in feedback from the meeting to make it a better draft). The high-level draft presents a set of classes derived from the policy sub-model to enable QoS conditions and actions to be efficiently represented. The low-level draft is derived from the network sub-model, and represents the capabilities of the device. As such, the low-level QoS draft fits in under the framework provided by the high-level QoS draft (e.g., it defines the operands that the high-level QoS draft uses). Two new drafts were presented, a requirements draft (which was revised before the deadline) and a framework draft. While the core drafts could be moved into last call, the chairs don't think that this is appropriate since the requirements and framework drafts need at least one more revision. Therefore, the chairs took the following action items: 1) work with the requirements and framework draft authors to try and get these documents revised as soon as is practical (target is before the end of the year) 2) in the meantime, the chairs will issue a series of focused mails defining what items in the various drafts seem to have working group consensus. The purpose of this second item is to show and define progress, and to ensure that issues that have been solved are not continually revisited. This should speed up the convergence process. regards, John and Ed