Re: [IPFIX] SIP/RTP extensions to IPFIX: SIPFIX
Atsushi Kobayashi <akoba@nttv6.net> Mon, 27 July 2009 07:20 UTC
Return-Path: <akoba@nttv6.net>
X-Original-To: ipfix@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB0703A69FA for <ipfix@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 00:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.325
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.325 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.785, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_LOCALHOST=0.457, HELO_LOCALHOST=3.941, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sgiRSQZvPsCB for <ipfix@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 00:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nttv6.net (mail.nttv6.net [IPv6:2001:fa8::25]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E1963A69AD for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 00:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (mail.nttv6.net [192.16.178.5]) by mail.nttv6.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6R7KanE030781; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:20:39 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from akoba@nttv6.net)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:20:41 +0900
From: Atsushi Kobayashi <akoba@nttv6.net>
To: Saverio Niccolini <Saverio.Niccolini@nw.neclab.eu>
In-Reply-To: <547F018265F92642B577B986577D671C9E3B8E@VENUS.office>
References: <547F018265F92642B577B986577D671C9E3B8E@VENUS.office>
Message-Id: <20090727160547.6700.17391CF2@nttv6.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.46 [ja]
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (mail.nttv6.net [192.16.178.5]); Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:20:40 +0900 (JST)
Cc: ipfix@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] SIP/RTP extensions to IPFIX: SIPFIX
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFIX WG discussion list <ipfix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 27 Jul 2009 07:20:41 -0000
Dear Saverio, and all, I support it. I have same opinion regarding problem statement section. Sip/rtp monitoring would be useful for other trouble shooting case. It would be utilized more, when a end customer asks the quality degradation, the terminal configuration, or busy line. And it can be applied to IPTV monitoring as well. I have one question. Is the title "SIPFIX" suitable for IETF document? I think generalized name is better. Regards, Atsushi On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:46:06 +0200 "Saverio Niccolini" <Saverio.Niccolini@nw.neclab.eu> wrote: > Dear all, > > we just submitted the draft about SIP/RTP extensions to IPFIX: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-huici-ipfix-sipfix-00.txt > > The current draft (to make it easier to read) presents the > problem-statement and the standardizing solution all in one > document. If this draft proceeds we will take care of splitting > these two items later on. > > The first question for the group is: > is this something you would like to discuss in the context of this WG? > > We know from our experience that currently information about > SIP and RTP sessions is exported in proprietary ways and that > would be useful to have L7 information in the IPFIX to enable > better (and application-aware) monitoring solutions at collectors > (or mediators). > > Let us know any comments you can have, > Saverio >
- [IPFIX] SIP/RTP extensions to IPFIX: SIPFIX Saverio Niccolini
- Re: [IPFIX] SIP/RTP extensions to IPFIX: SIPFIX Atsushi Kobayashi
- Re: [IPFIX] SIP/RTP extensions to IPFIX: SIPFIX Saverio Niccolini