[Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-claise-export-application-info-in-ipfix-05

"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Sat, 07 April 2012 09:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D751C21F8541; Sat, 7 Apr 2012 02:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.338
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.338 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.260, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6ERYMTKJfhmn; Sat, 7 Apr 2012 02:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com (mail-we0-f172.google.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 589E621F850B; Sat, 7 Apr 2012 02:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by werb10 with SMTP id b10so2154168wer.31 for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 07 Apr 2012 02:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=I+BgFIi8lfL0Blu+zQu6V+8cMgXaUpH/JKQnZN28U7w=; b=yq6o5N5rZRm0iInIlu502BLycwLGjEgE0XLBmzG5MRE0Q/aCn1CF0PKrgvgD3TjQmO 2il4pMHpxxQu+xAeH+cxdsp52Eathb6OjvN+rmnHydb3dob9gZ3BoFPgXqsN25XQGQns MtvViS3DmNNFu5bd7g9DP6xmtHcTcW9QpyQa1qQECyZSXqpJi8aFd0ctQXVbW4RLa8Ef +xC4LN1FqR7u28FKSvlrqIeLu5TDV2gOIL/T8ADOn8+IDuB6mwEQraMrfxZ8d54WxO/D AxfBu4xgx3dshTvhPG7IKEXeiVmSJjXH3XhnT2Hl3C8xUFyTa9gjr0Zx96Go+s8bwYHv tzhg==
Received: by with SMTP id gc1mr2186264wib.13.1333792561353; Sat, 07 Apr 2012 02:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from windows8d787f9 ([]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j3sm21903374wiw.1.2012. (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 07 Apr 2012 02:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: draft-claise-export-application-info-in-ipfix.all@tools.ietf.org
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2012 12:54:31 +0300
Message-ID: <4f800f2f.634cb40a.13a1.ffff8003@mx.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001F_01CD14BD.951D43F0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
thread-index: Ac0UpG0cMvU2C0UrT7SzRsZNsOhy0w==
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, 'IETF' <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-claise-export-application-info-in-ipfix-05
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: Sat, 07 Apr 2012 09:56:05 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at


Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you
may receive.


Document: draft-claise-export-application-info-in-ipfix-05

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date:2012-4-7

IETF LC End Date: 2012-4-17

IESG Telechat date:


Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as an Informational RFC.


Major issues:


Minor issues:


1.       In sections 2, 4.1 (PANA-L7), 5, 6.5 the draft points to
information in Cisco web page. I could not locate and information that is
referenced. The link is to the main Cisco web page. For example in section
6.5 it lists the selectorID as 10000, where is this value located?

2.       For the definition of Classification engine IDs in section 4.1 for
the non standard values like PANA-L3, PANA-L4, PANA-L7, PANA-L2, is there a
requirement that the selector IDs will be publically available?

3.       In section 4.2 "However, an IANA L3 protocol encoding may encoded
with 3 bytes." When is it encoded in 3 bytes, also figure 2 is not
reflecting this example, I expected to see a 32 bit value according to the
text and not a general figure. (small nit in the above sentence "may be"
instead of "may".

4.       In section 7 I noticed that "p2pTechnology, tunnelTechnology, and
encryptedTechnology" are already assigned in the IANA IPFIX Information
elements so why assign them again as new?

5.       In section 7 I noticed that you request that the
applicationDescription, applicationId, applicationName,
classificationEngineId will receive elementid values from the range 0-127.
My reading from section 4.2 is this is not required, maybe add text that
will explain this request.

6.       In the security section are there additional considerations when
the applicationid information is coming from a proprietary classification
engine about authentication of the information source?


Nits/editorial comments:


1.       In section 4.1 last sentence what is the meaning of "by theses
specifications" , I did not understand the context.

2.       In section 6.6 "to determine whether or the default HTTP port"
delete the "or"

3.       In section 6.6 "The Classification Engine ID is 2" should be "3".