RE: Deleting ipSecPolicyTimePeriod related classes from IPsec PIB

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for pinging/reminding me.

It seems that I last reviewed revision 9 ad that I should take
a look at rev 10. Will put it on my todo list.
Not sure I can get to it before the end of IETF61.
Actaully I doubt I will be able to do so before Nov 15 or so.
Pls ping me again around that time if I have not answered.

Bert

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Man.M.Li@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:Man.M.Li@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 19:33
> To: bwijnen@xxxxxxxxxx; ipsec-policy@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Deleting ipSecPolicyTimePeriod related classes from IPsec PIB
> 
> 
> Hi Bert,
> 
> In March, we received your comments on IPsec PIB and made 
> modifications accordingly. The only remaining issue is about 
> the ipSecPolicyTimePeriod classes. You and I discussed two 
> solutions and both seemed to have some drawback:
> 
> Solution #1. Put the ipSecPolicyTImePeriod classes into a 
> separate module within the IPsec PIB document. The drawback 
> is that since the title of the draft is IPsec PIB, it should 
> not contain a separate module that is not IPsec related. 
> People will probably not look into this draft to find time 
> related PIB classes
> 
> Solution #2. Put the ipSecPolicyTime Period classes into a 
> separate module in a separate IETF draft. The drawback is 
> that it seems to me that IETF does not want to entertain 
> another PIB draft. 
> 
> At the end of our April e-mail discussions, you were going to 
> check if the TimePeriod classes are the only ones that should 
> be separate from the IPsec PIB. I am now proposing another 
> simpler solution as follows. 
> 
> If, after checking the document, you also think that the 
> TimePeriod classes are the only ones that are not IPsec 
> specific, what about we delete the ipSecPolicyTimePeriod 
> classes from the IPsec PIB so that we can move on?
> 
> If on the other hand, you think that there are other stuff 
> that are not IPsec specific, please let use know. Thanks.
> 
> Best regards
> Man Li
> 
>