Re: Bringing the ARCH draft to WG Last Call

[Martin Stiemerling <stiemerling@netlab.nec.de>]

Hi,

--On Mittwoch, 18. August 2004 6:51 Uhr -0400 Marie-Jose Montpetit 
<mariejose.montpetit@verizon.net> wrote:

| There are a few remainning outstanding issues before the ARCH draft can be
| brought to WGLC. These were briefly discussed at the IETF but need a wider
| discussion on the list.
| 1. Should there be some requirements to allow end to end management of IP
| flows
| this would enable enable operators to better configure, verify and
| distribute policies regarding specific flows; there is heritage there from
| the cable industry

I currently have the problem to understand what exactly the end-to-end 
management of IP flows is in the context of ipdvb. Management means too 
many different things to people.  Could you give me a hint?

| 2. Should address resolution be used to map specific addresses to PIDs
| with special features
| This would allow to combine AR with resource management, load balancing
| and QoS

The Internet-style solution would be AR does AR, no more no less.  All the 
other things belong into different protocols, it should be all IETF-safe 
"Protocol do only things they are intended to do" and Keep it Simple, 
Stupid (KISS).


  Martin

| 3. Should extension headers carry information about the cell content over
| the MPEG-2 section of the network
| There are multiple uses of that including flow management.
|
| In addition we will add a protocol stack to the draft to show where ULE
| is.
|
| Since we would like to finalise this shortly I would appreciate comments
| on these issues and closure before 6/25.
|
| Thanks
|
|
| Marie-Jose Montpetit
|
|