Adrian,
Not an answer to the process question, but some background information
on this draft.
This draft, which is now 3 years old, has been evolving with the IPFIX
standardization.
For example, looking at
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-yourtchenko-cisco-ies-09.txt,
you can see the interaction with the IPFIX WG document
ietf-ipfix-data-link-layer-monitoring: now that
ietf-ipfix-data-link-layer-monitoring is in the RFC editor queue, the
draft has been simplified, and some IPFIX Information Elements in the
range 1-127 became deprecated.
This explains why the draft has been presented and reviewed multiple
times in the IPFIX WG, and also why it would benefit from a wider review
than the independent stream.
Regards, Benoit (as draft author)
Hi,
I have a process question on this last call which is not clear from the last
call text.
Are we being asked to consider whether publication of this document is useful,
or are we being asked for IETF consensus on the *content* of the document?
It seems from the document that the content is descriptive of something
implemented by a single vendor. I applaud putting that information into the
public domain, but I don't understand the meaning of IETF consensus with respect
to this document.
Thanks,
Adrian
-----Original Message-----
From: IETF-Announce [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On
Behalf Of The
IESG
Sent: 21 January 2014 12:33
To: IETF-Announce
Subject: Last Call: <draft-yourtchenko-cisco-ies-09.txt> (Cisco Specific
Information Elements reused in IPFIX) to Informational RFC
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Cisco Specific Information Elements reused in IPFIX'
<draft-yourtchenko-cisco-ies-09.txt> as Informational RFC
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(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2014-02-18. Exceptionally, comments
may be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document describes some additional Information Elements of Cisco
Systems, Inc. that are not listed in RFC3954.
The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yourtchenko-cisco-ies/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yourtchenko-cisco-ies/ballot/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
.