IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Mon, 15 April 2013 09:36 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77B9F21F936D; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 02:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r1-YI7+ehvAv; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 02:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6CA121F9361; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 02:36:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r3F9aPdv015778; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:36:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.60.67.88] (ams-bclaise-8917.cisco.com [10.60.67.88]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r3F9Zdhs010177; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:35:54 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <516BC9EB.3000303@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:35:39 +0200
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
References: <4F6BB53A.3070609@nostrum.com> <514B808F.3050203@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <514B808F.3050203@joelhalpern.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090206070705000507060502"
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, ipfix-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech@tools.ietf.org, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-14.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:36:29 -0000

Joel,

Thanks for your review.
>
> Minor issues:
>
>     If compliance is a big issue, then this document seems 
> under-specified. For example, it says in section 5.1 "In order to be 
> compliant with this document, at least the Property Match Filtering 
> MUST be implemented." However, Property Match Filtering as defined in 
> section 5.1.1 is a range of behaviors, so it is unclear which property 
> tests must be supported (any, all possible?) in order to be compliant.
>
I believe that this is fine.
The compliance statement is similar (i.e. generic) to the PSAMP RFC 5475.


        7 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5475#section-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.

Regards, Benoit.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email