[IPFIX] IETF 81: New work for IPFIX ...

Nevil Brownlee <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz> Mon, 20 June 2011 04:38 UTC

Return-Path: <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz>
X-Original-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ACA821F8503 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:38:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UcP+zCE7F7LM for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2-int.auckland.ac.nz (mx2-int.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.12.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1701D21F8504 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=auckland.ac.nz; i=n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz; q=dns/txt; s=uoa; t=1308544724; x=1340080724; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject: content-transfer-encoding; z=Message-ID:=20<4DFECECB.4010000@auckland.ac.nz>|Date:=20 Mon,=2020=20Jun=202011=2016:38:35=20+1200|From:=20Nevil =20Brownlee=20<n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz>|MIME-Version: =201.0|To:=20IPFIX=20Working=20Group=20<ipfix@ietf.org> |Subject:=20IETF=2081:=20New=20work=20for=20IPFIX=20... |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit; bh=8Hq8iR4uxK6+8So9ADyy8GKLHnSEJdf2TTlxNZANZCM=; b=X0wMa5vh1qED5EbdLMYeoPppYc5PE1qkxn2uiAovqXgK/XAYKEkWTPfT r8ry2B02R1oG9Z9xqfcu9lGxuGauc1w7oNq+hfXl0WtNlxmzAOQtMY3Sn vH97WyII4axjdx4CendfHlOz3sg8wcwyaSfvdQF/539PWQcDjsr3X8TQk Q=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,391,1304251200"; d="scan'208";a="68142353"
X-Ironport-HAT: UNIVERSITY - $RELAY-THROTTLE
X-Ironport-Source: 130.216.38.131 - Outgoing - Outgoing-SSL
Received: from nevil-laptop1.sfac.auckland.ac.nz (HELO [130.216.38.131]) ([130.216.38.131]) by mx2-int.auckland.ac.nz with ESMTP; 20 Jun 2011 16:38:35 +1200
Message-ID: <4DFECECB.4010000@auckland.ac.nz>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:38:35 +1200
From: Nevil Brownlee <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IPFIX Working Group <ipfix@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [IPFIX] IETF 81: New work for IPFIX ...
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 20 Jun 2011 04:38:45 -0000

Hi all:

It looks as though the flow-selection draft will be ready to submit
before the Quebec IETF meeting, so it's time to start discussion
on new charter items.  Looking back at the minutes from IETF 80 in
Prague, possible items are:

1. New versions of the base standards, 5101 and 5102, which implement
    small changes that did not affect interoperation, (for example
    adding detail where there are gaps in 5101) as a Standards Track
    successor to 5101.  Once that had been published as an RFC
    for some time we could work on moving it to Draft; that should be
    possible in a reasonably short time.

2. IE Doctors, a draft that "lays out the ground rules for developing
    new IPFIX Information Elements, and clarifies how the IE Registry
    process works." The issues here are
    a. Should we develop an 'IE Guidelines' draft?
    b. Do we want to have an 'IE Doctors' team (with IESG overview),
       an expanded group of IE Expert reviewers, or what?

3. IPFIX Aggregation.  This seems (to me) to be a required function
    for IPFIX Mediation.

4. IPFIX Mediation protocol draft.

5. Exporting MIB variables using IPFIX draft.

For any of these that we adopt as new work items, I'd like to know
  - who is prepared to work on writing/editing?  (at least 2 people)
  - who is prepared to review these drafts as they change from time
    to time?  (at least three people)
If you are prepared to do either of these, please email me a list
of which item numbers in the list above you're willing to write/edit
and/or to review.

So, do please send your comments on these to the list, so that we
can have an informed discussion in Quebec City.

Cheers, Nevil (IPFIX co-chair)

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
  Nevil Brownlee                    Computer Science Department | ITS
  Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941             The University of Auckland
  FAX: +64 9 373 7453   Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand