IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-text-adt-08.txt

Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch> Mon, 04 August 2014 08:10 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@trammell.ch>
X-Original-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 183CC1B28B2 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 01:10:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZtYtppg7o7rE for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 01:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from trammell.ch (trammell1.nine.ch [5.148.172.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BCB61B288E for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 01:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pb-10243.ethz.ch (pb-10243.ethz.ch [82.130.102.152]) by trammell.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 289321A03F8; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 10:10:19 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D501237D-3AEF-4692-9B45-16DB5D3B43AD"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>
In-Reply-To: <53DF3E8E.5050905@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 10:10:19 +0200
Message-Id: <A9D47C27-897B-4090-A6DA-AF330A05DE67@trammell.ch>
References: <20140804050737.28858.12663.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <0CBA48F7-719E-482C-968C-10C00CF57882@trammell.ch> <53DF3E8E.5050905@cisco.com>
To: Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/7CUsFpNmzrHBeLCK-daRB7YXN6g
Cc: "ipfix@ietf.org Group" <ipfix@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-text-adt-08.txt
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFIX WG discussion list <ipfix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipfix>, <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipfix/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipfix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix>, <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 08:10:57 -0000

On 04 Aug 2014, at 10:04, Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com> wrote:

> Brian,
> 
>> This revision addresses final IETF LC comments on extensibility and copy/paste errors in the examples (thanks, Paul)!
> 
> You missed tcpControlBits: since it's defined as unsigned16 in [IANA], you should either use unsigned16 or explain why unsigned8 is being used (eg, say that reduced-size encoding is being used).
> 
> Recall:
> 
>>> And tcpControlBits:
>>> 
>>>          tcpControlBits(6)<unsigned8>[1]
>>> 
>>> - has been revised to unsigned16 [RFC7125]. Changing this would also make Figure 2 align more neatly.

Note that in a textual encoding, alignment is irrelevant.

>> It'll probably still be exported as 1 byte everywhere, but the type is indeed unsigned16

Ah, indeed. Rev -09 then.

> 
> It would be useful to discuss reduced size encoding and show a specific example. eg, if I'm collecting ingressInterface which is nominally a u32, but I'm a small device so I only export a u8, should I export:
> 
> ingressInterface(10)<unsigned32>[1]
> 
> or
> 
> ingressInterface(10)<unsigned8>[1]

This is an interesting question but it would not appear to be in scope at all for this document. 

Thanks, cheers,

Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email