Re: [IPFIX] IPFIX at IETF 89, London

[Paul Aitken <[e-mail]>]

Nevil,

I updated a couple of drafts. If the WG is to close, then I'll be 
looking for a new home for these, because this is important work which 
does need addressed:


aitken-ipfix-equivalent-ies 
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-aitken-ipfix-equivalent-ies>

    This document specifies a method for an Exporter to inform a
    Collector of equivalence between different Information Elements, so
    that the Collecting Process can understand the equivalence and be
    enabled to process data across a change of Information Elements,
    which allows a seamless transition from Enterprise-specific to
    IANA-standard elements.

aitken-ipfix-unobserved-fields 
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-aitken-ipfix-unobserved-fields>

    This draft discusses several methods for reporting when fields are
    unavailable, reviews the advantages and disadvantage of each, and
    recommends methods which should be used.
    Cisco has already implemented some of the mechanisms in this draft.


P.


On 03/02/2014 08:08, Nevil Brownlee wrote:
>
> Hi IPFIXers:
>
> Back when session scheduling for IETF 89 started, I requested a
> slot for IPFIX, "just in case."
>
> Since then the Link-Layer Attributes and Mediation Protocol drafts
> have been sent to the RFC Editor, and the text-adt draft is in WGLC.
>
> We expect a new revision of the MIB Variable export draft shortly,
> so that would be the only agenda item for London.  I feel that
> version can be reviewed and discussed on the IPFIX list, so we
> don't now need to have a formal IPFIX meeting in London.
>
> If you believe that a meeting is needed, please email the list
> telling us what that is, and why we need meeting time for it.
> If I don't see such email(s) within the next week, we'll cancel
> the meeting.
>
> Cheers, Nevil
>