Re: [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-data-link-layer-monitoring-07.txt
Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com> Tue, 05 November 2013 14:52 UTC
Return-Path: <paitken@cisco.com>
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 56BD921E8297 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:52:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ASTkUmE2xOkM for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:52:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D41821E830F for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:52:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=521; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1383663127; x=1384872727; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vw2m8+b1ZHEPqr3DNxM4SqZxeby3MSYmzRVicgBQrNY=; b=MOAxmKt4Dy9T/R6JF4yghqkPoxfP1LyJGIy2i1CjO4QumiSg8/cq4wJx N5F9nUXoRdIpch+Y7IilOvrNPyPBw6XoyVoKPl8YiVQan3sx26MC4PYZi yLtrvxoQ05tksc0uLeiX1stBSoiLzD82kpS3y65b8mEtKrNold73GdpjY Q=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,640,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="161416677"
Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Nov 2013 14:52:06 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rA5EpxTN012033 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 5 Nov 2013 14:52:01 GMT
Received: from [144.254.153.23] (dhcp-144-254-153-23.cisco.com [144.254.153.23]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id rA5EpwiZ012919; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 14:51:59 GMT
Message-ID: <52790609.2040008@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 14:51:53 +0000
From: Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ipfix@ietf.org
References: <20131104130718.10097.9955.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5277A0FE.8020000@cisco.com> <5278F91D.80609@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <5278F91D.80609@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-data-link-layer-monitoring-07.txt
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 14:52:15 -0000
Benoit Claise wrote: >> Our view is that IANA's IPFIX registry is now the ultimate reference, >> so we don't constantly have to be referring back to old RFCs in each >> new draft. > That makes sense since RFC 7012 mentions that IANA registry is now THE > reference For the record, IANA's IPFIX registry MUST be the reference because 20% of the Information Elements in the registry are not defined in any RFC. So if you only refer to RFCs, you will be missing 20% of the Information Elements. P.
- [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-data-link-la… internet-drafts
- Re: [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-data-lin… Paul Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-data-lin… Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-data-lin… Paul Aitken