Re: [OPSAWG] Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

2024-01-17 Thread mohamed . boucadair
gt; tsv-...@ietf.org > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh@ietf.org; > opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : Re: Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo- > v6eh-05 > > On 1/17/2024 3:34 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: > > [Med] This

Re: [OPSAWG] Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

2024-01-17 Thread Wesley Eddy
On 1/17/2024 3:34 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: [Med] This can be part of regular code updates. Please note that this is not unusual in ipfix (see for example ipv4Options, natevent, etc. in https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml which depend on an IANA registry). Ok; do

Re: [OPSAWG] Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

2024-01-17 Thread mohamed . boucadair
Hi Wes, Please see inline. Cheers, Med De : Wesley Eddy Envoyé : mardi 16 janvier 2024 21:21 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET ; tsv-...@ietf.org Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org Objet : Re: Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05 On 1/16

Re: [OPSAWG] Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

2024-01-16 Thread Wesley Eddy
On 1/16/2024 11:10 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: Are you expecting the implementation to have an exhaustive list of all of the ExIDs in use to understand the difference between 2 and 4 byte usage? */[Med] Yes because otherwise an implem can’t unambiguously identify and extract

Re: [OPSAWG] Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

2024-01-16 Thread mohamed . boucadair
Hi Wes, Please see inline. Cheers, Med De : Wesley Eddy Envoyé : mardi 16 janvier 2024 16:09 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET ; tsv-...@ietf.org Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org Objet : Re: Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

Re: [OPSAWG] Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

2024-01-16 Thread Wesley Eddy
The changes look good to me; I just want to make sure you understand one of my questions that doesn't look like it was clear enough: On 1/15/2024 4:13 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: - The way an implementation understands the TCP ExIDs may benefit from slightly more explanation: --

Re: [OPSAWG] Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

2024-01-15 Thread mohamed . boucadair
Wesley Eddy via Datatracker > Envoyé : mardi 2 janvier 2024 19:20 > À : tsv-...@ietf.org > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh@ietf.org; > opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh- > 05 > > Reviewer: Wesley Eddy >

[OPSAWG] Tsvart early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-tcpo-v6eh-05

2024-01-02 Thread Wesley Eddy via Datatracker
Reviewer: Wesley Eddy Review result: Ready with Issues Comments: - The document is well-written and easy to read. - Section 6 is really nice and helpful! Issues: - The way an implementation understands the TCP ExIDs may benefit from slightly more explanation: -- In 4.2 and 4.3, is the idea