Re: [IPFIX] draft-kashima-ipfix-data-link-layer-monitoring

[Hadriel Kaplan <[e-mail]>]

Sure, but a dataLinkFrameType wouldn't be a static list known at the time you define the IE for it.  For example, new frame types are still being added for libpcap (and libpcap has been around for decades).  Methinks you'll want a type-list you can easily expand in the future.

-hadriel

On Nov 9, 2010, at 1:31 AM, Shingo KASHIMA wrote:

> 
> Hi Hadriel and all,
> 
> Thanks for your information.
> 
> I undarstood IPFIX IEs have two kins of enumeration values.
> 
> - To be defined as independent type
> e.g. mplsTopLabelType
> - To be defined in own description
> e.g. flowEndReason, biflowDirection
> 
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 01:02:53 -0500
> Hadriel Kaplan <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Nov 8, 2010, at 10:08 PM, Shingo KASHIMA wrote:
>> 
>>> Then let's see existing IEs.
>>> - flowEndReason includes a value list in its description.
>>> - biflowDirection includes a value list in its description.
>>> Are there IEs which do not include a value list in their description ?
>>> 
>>> Which is IPFIX IEs registries policy, to be defined in the IE
>>> description or in separate registries ?
>>> We should follow our policy.
>>> Or, dataLinkFrameType is a different kind of IE from existing IEs
>>> such as flowEndReason and biflowDirection ?
>> 
>> I think he means more like mplsTopLabelType, which has an actual registry for its enumeration values. (See http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml#ipfix-mpls-label-type)
>> 
>> -hadriel
> 
> -- 
> Shingo KASHIMA <[e-mail]>
> NTT Information Sharing Platform Lab.
> 
>