Re: [IPFIX] comments on draft-johnson-ipfix-mib-variable-export-01

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:52:19AM -0400, Chris Inacio wrote:

> Here are my comments on the draft.  This model is much improved and
> with some minor additional clarification I think it should be much
> more seriously considered.  I did everything as PDF comments to the
> PDF version of the draft.  I've attached it here.

Inacio,

thanks for your comments. While going through them, we were not sure
what you meant with your common on Figure 1:

  Maybe a little too implementation specific. This could all be
  represented in DTMF CIM format with a translation to SNMP/MIB.

Can you please elaborate? My view is that "Instrumentation" is really
meant as being implementation specific and the figure does not rule
out that your instrumentation is in fact a DMTF CIM store as long as
it provides MIB object instrumentation consistent with definitions in
MIB modules.

Perhaps you can propose concrete edits to make it easier for us to
understand what you think should be changed?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>