R: R: Last Call Expired: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt
Dear Benoit, all I submitted v16 of the Internet Draft. I modified section 9.1.1 on the maintenance of the flowSelectorAlgorithm registry and fixed the editorial issue in section 6.1.1 I have also used MUST in section 6.1 Best regards, Salvatore Da: Benoit Claise [mailto:bcla...@cisco.com] Inviato: lunedì 15 aprile 2013 11:43 A: Salvatore D'Antonio Cc: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-t...@tools.ietf.org; ipfix-cha...@tools.ietf.org; 'S Moonesamy'; apps-disc...@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org; 'Joel M. Halpern'; 'A. Jean Mahoney'; 'General Area Review Team'; 'IETF discussion list'; rah...@cisco.com; ip...@ietf.org Oggetto: Re: R: Last Call Expired: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt Salvatore Dear all, A new version of the Internet Draft on Flow Selection Techniques has been submitted. It contains the following changes: - A new section illustrating the difference between Intermediate Flow Selection Process and Intermediate Selection Process has been added, - The sentence In order to be compliant with this document, at least the Property Match Filtering MUST be implemented. has been removed in Section 1, - “MUST” has been replaced with “SHOULD” in Section 5.1, Actually, the feedback was: In Section 1: In order to be compliant with this document, at least the Property Match Filtering MUST be implemented. The above text is repeated in Section 5.1. I suggest removing this sentence as it does not seem related to scope. My reading of the MUST is that it is being used for compliance instead of the reasons described in RFC 2119. I suggest reviewing the usage of RFC 2119 key words in Section 5.1. So the solution is not to change MUST to SHOULD. The question is whether MUST versus must must be used. I understand the concern. For compliance reason with the PSAMP RFC 5475 (which is closely related) ... http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5475#section-7 7. Parameters for the Description of Selection Techniques This section gives an overview of different alternative selection schemes and their required parameters. In order to be compliant with PSAMP, at least one of proposed schemes MUST be implemented. ... I would keep the initial MUST from the previous draft version. - “The flowSelectorAlgorithm registry is maintained by IANA. has been replaced with “IANA is requested to create the flowSelectorAlgorithm registry.” - The sentence The registry can be updated when specifications of the new technique(s) and any new Information Elements are provided. has been removed since it did not clarify how the registry will be managed. - Section 6.1.1 “Property Match Filtering” has been changed by adding some text on how Property Match Filtering can be used by an Intermediate Flow Selection Process in the Metering Process, in the Exporting Process and within an IPFIX Mediator. When publishing a new version, please correct this editorial issue. ... and Flow duration. in the An example is the selection of the largest ... Best regards, Salvatore Da: Benoit Claise [mailto:bcla...@cisco.com] Inviato: lunedì 8 aprile 2013 15:21 A: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-t...@tools.ietf.org Cc: ipfix-cha...@tools.ietf.org Oggetto: Fwd: Last Call Expired: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt Dear authors, The IETF last call has finished. Can you please update your draft based on the feedback received. Then I will progress it. Regards, Benoit Original Message Subject: Last Call Expired: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:28:46 -0700 From: DraftTracker Mail System mailto:iesg-secret...@ietf.org iesg-secret...@ietf.org To: i...@ietf.org, ipfix-cha...@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-t...@tools.ietf.org CC: iesg-secret...@ietf.org Please DO NOT reply to this email. I-D: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt ID Tracker URL: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech/ IETF Last Call has ended, and the state has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead. _ Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3272 / Database dei virus: 3162/6231 - Data di rilascio: 07/04/2013 *** IL MERITO DEGLI STUDENTI VIENE RICONOSCIUTO Il 5 per mille all'Università degli Studi di Napoli Parthenopeincrementa le borse di studio agli studenti - codice fiscale 80018240632 http://www.uniparthenope.it/index.php/5xmille http://www.uniparthenope.it/index.php/5xmille http://www.uniparthenope.it/index.php/it/avvisi-sito-di-ateneo/2943-la-parthenope-premia-il-tuo-voto-di-diploma-ed-il-tuo-imegno-con-i-proventi-del-5-per-mille http://www.uniparthenope.it/index.php/it/avvisi-sito-di-ateneo/2943
R: Last Call Expired: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt
Dear all, A new version of the Internet Draft on Flow Selection Techniques has been submitted. It contains the following changes: - A new section illustrating the difference between Intermediate Flow Selection Process and Intermediate Selection Process has been added, - The sentence In order to be compliant with this document, at least the Property Match Filtering MUST be implemented. has been removed in Section 1, - “MUST” has been replaced with “SHOULD” in Section 5.1, - “The flowSelectorAlgorithm registry is maintained by IANA. has been replaced with “IANA is requested to create the flowSelectorAlgorithm registry.” - The sentence The registry can be updated when specifications of the new technique(s) and any new Information Elements are provided. has been removed since it did not clarify how the registry will be managed. - Section 6.1.1 “Property Match Filtering” has been changed by adding some text on how Property Match Filtering can be used by an Intermediate Flow Selection Process in the Metering Process, in the Exporting Process and within an IPFIX Mediator. Best regards, Salvatore Da: Benoit Claise [mailto:bcla...@cisco.com] Inviato: lunedì 8 aprile 2013 15:21 A: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-t...@tools.ietf.org Cc: ipfix-cha...@tools.ietf.org Oggetto: Fwd: Last Call Expired: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt Dear authors, The IETF last call has finished. Can you please update your draft based on the feedback received. Then I will progress it. Regards, Benoit Original Message Subject: Last Call Expired: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:28:46 -0700 From: DraftTracker Mail System mailto:iesg-secret...@ietf.org iesg-secret...@ietf.org To: i...@ietf.org, ipfix-cha...@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-t...@tools.ietf.org CC: iesg-secret...@ietf.org Please DO NOT reply to this email. I-D: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt ID Tracker URL: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech/ IETF Last Call has ended, and the state has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead. _ Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3272 / Database dei virus: 3162/6231 - Data di rilascio: 07/04/2013 ** IL MERITO DEGLI STUDENTI VIENE RICONOSCIUTO Il 5 per mille all'Universita' degli Studi di Napoli Parthenope incrementa le borse di studio agli studenti - codice fiscale 80018240632 http://www.uniparthenope.it/index.php/5xmille http://www.uniparthenope.it/index.php/it/avvisi-sito-di-ateneo/2943-la-parthenope-premia-il-tuo-voto-di-diploma-ed-il-tuo-imegno-con-i-proventi-del-5-per-mille Questa informativa e' inserita in automatico dal sistema al fine esclusivo della realizzazione dei fini istituzionali dell'ente.
R: [IPFIX] Last Call: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt (Flow Selection Techniques) to Proposed Standard
Dear Benoit, Will do. Kind regards, Salvatore Da: Benoit Claise [mailto:bcla...@cisco.com] Inviato: mercoledì 20 marzo 2013 09:36 A: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-t...@tools.ietf.org Cc: IETF-Discussion list; Rahul Patel; ip...@ietf.org Oggetto: Re: [IPFIX] Last Call: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt (Flow Selection Techniques) to Proposed Standard Dear authors, While reviewing draft-ietf-ipfix-mediation-protocol, Rahul got some feedback that actually concerns draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech. Can you please take this into account. Regards, Benoit Few comments. 1. Page 8: 1. The difference between Intermediate Selection Process and Intermediate Flow Selection Process is not clear. Is the first one selecting record purely on matching content (value of the fields) in the record and the second one selecting on matching attributes of the fields that are not part of the record in *addition* to matching content in the record? An example would help here. BC Granted, this is difficult to understand from the definitions only. There is some history behind these two separate definitions. Anyway, you get it right from your message above. I was thinking to add to a section 2.1 Differences between Intermediate Selection Process and Intermediate Flow Selection Process in the draft-ietf-ipfix-mediation-protocol draft. However, thinking about it some more, this section should really be done in draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14, to avoid some more confusion. There is already section 3. Difference between Intermediate Flow Selection Process and Packet Selection. Some more text should be added on the difference between Intermediate Selection Process and Intermediate Flow Selection Process When created, draft-ietf-ipfix-mediation-protocol will refer to that new section. 1. 1. Also in the example e.g., Filtering only records from a given network to a given Collector - Does given network means source-ip/source-prefix of the exporter?. BC It means matching the flow records to a certain prefix/AS/you-name-it, and exporting those matched flow records to an exporter. See for example, section 6.1 in RFC 6183 This could be explained better in the new section in draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech (See previous point) The IESG has received a request from the IP Flow Information Export WG (ipfix) to consider the following document: - 'Flow Selection Techniques' draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt as Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-04-01. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to i...@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract Intermediate Flow Selection Process is the process of selecting a subset of Flows from all observed Flows. The Intermediate Flow Selection Process may be located at an IPFIX Exporter, Collector, or within an IPFIX Mediator. It reduces the effort of post-processing Flow data and transferring Flow Records. This document describes motivations for using the Intermediate Flow Selection process and presents Intermediate Flow Selection techniques. It provides an information model for configuring Intermediate Flow Selection Process techniques and discusses what information about an Intermediate Flow Selection Process should be exported. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech/ballot/ The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1540/ ___ IPFIX mailing list ip...@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix _ Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.2904 / Database dei virus: 2641/6186 - Data di rilascio: 18/03/2013
