ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Last Call: <draft-yourtchenko-cisco-ies-09.txt> (Cisco Specific Information Elements reused in IPFIX) to Informational RFC

2014-02-14 12:05:50
Hello Adrian,

I've uploaded today the http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yourtchenko-cisco-ies-10 that hopefully took into account the review by changing the text of the Abstract and Introduction.

Please take a look for the new revision, and let us know what you think.

Many thanks!

--a

On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Adrian Farrel wrote:


Thanks Benoit, that is an important point and is really helpful.



So, do I read you right if I say that this document records some NetFlow v9 
features and codepoints that were
accidentally missed when RFC 3954 was written.



Or are these later modifications to NetFlow v9 (let's call it v9.x) that use 
the same code point range but were not
actually part of v9?



The question might arise as to whether this document is supposed to update 3954.



Thanks,

Adrian



From: Benoit Claise [mailto:bclaise(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com]
Sent: 28 January 2014 09:47
To: adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; Andrew 
Yourtchenko
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-yourtchenko-cisco-ies-09.txt> (Cisco Specific 
Information Elements reused in IPFIX) to
Informational RFC



Let me reply to myself: I forgot an important point, which might be useful if 
people start discussing AD sponsoring of
this document, without actually having read it.

Let me stress the first sentence of the Introduction section.

   The section 4 of [RFC7012] defines the IPFIX Information Elements in

   the range of 1-127 to be compatible with the NetFlow version 9

   fields, as specified in the "Cisco Systems NetFlow Services Export

   Version 9" [RFC3954].
So this draft is clearly linked to the work in IPFIX RFC 7012 (IPFIX 
information model) and must follow the RFC 7013
rules (Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of IPFIX Information Elements), 
therefore would benefit from more reviews.

It's probably not too clear from the abstract, and should be improved.

OLD:

   This document describes some additional Information Elements of Cisco

   Systems, Inc. that are not listed in RFC3954



NEW:

   This document describes some additional IPFIX Information Elements in    the range of 1-127, which is the range compatible with field types used
   by NetFlow version 9 in RFC3954, as specified in the IPFIX Information Model

   RFC 7012.



Regards, Benoit (an as author)



      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.


      .


      .