Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group.
Paul Aitken <paitken@Brocade.com> Mon, 15 December 2014 11:22 UTC
Return-Path: <paitken@Brocade.com>
X-Original-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18D201A1B16 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:22:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g5ALRMNBfE7v for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:22:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-000f0801.pphosted.com (mx0b-000f0801.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:71::1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A288C1A1B1A for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:22:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0000700 [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-000f0801.pphosted.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id sBFAaEve029715; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:22:34 -0800
Received: from brmwp-exchub02.corp.brocade.com ([208.47.132.227]) by mx0b-000f0801.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1r85tn4tcr-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:22:34 -0800
Received: from BRMWP-EXMB12.corp.brocade.com (172.16.59.130) by BRMWP-EXCHUB02.corp.brocade.com (172.16.187.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 04:22:33 -0700
Received: from EMEAWP-CASH01.corp.brocade.com (172.29.18.10) by BRMWP-EXMB12.corp.brocade.com (172.16.59.130) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.995.29; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 04:22:32 -0700
Received: from EMEA-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::18c9:7b21:74fd:7e48]) by EMEAWP-CASH01.corp.brocade.com ([::1]) with mapi; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 12:22:31 +0100
From: Paul Aitken <paitken@Brocade.com>
To: Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 12:22:29 +0100
Thread-Topic: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group.
Thread-Index: AdAXHEKwRRNEnIV0TIy+wahbqK8JBQBNGiig
Message-ID: <23B7BE54EACBED43957AB709C564F7B701853E214C@EMEA-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com>
References: <5435D840.1090108@bogus.com> <5487A31D.5040304@bogus.com> <548B4AA0.4000905@bogus.com> <CABwmyRo985=hrkAsGPTXxFbkE-2cC88btQDmK1kP0+YVAe18Qw@mail.gmail.com> <23B7BE54EACBED43957AB709C564F7B701853E1EC5@EMEA-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com> <A98CA95F-7638-45BD-B87D-209F3EDF1982@trammell.ch>
In-Reply-To: <A98CA95F-7638-45BD-B87D-209F3EDF1982@trammell.ch>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.13.68, 1.0.33, 0.0.0000 definitions=2014-12-15_01:2014-12-13,2014-12-14,1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1402240000 definitions=main-1412150107
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/TTVbveXgdRPdX4Mqp1TXN_ZEHEI
Cc: "joelja@gmail.com" <joelja@gmail.com>, "ipfix@ietf.org" <ipfix@ietf.org>, "ipfix-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <ipfix-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group.
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 15 Dec 2014 11:22:39 -0000
Brian, please see inline... Thanks, P. > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Trammell [mailto:ietf@trammell.ch] > Sent: 13 December 2014 21:32 > To: Paul Aitken > Cc: ipfix@ietf.org; joelja@gmail.com; ipfix-chairs@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. > > hi Paul, all, > > AFAIC, I sent in my review on 15 August 2014, edits were made 26 Oct, I > followed up 27 Oct. The *document* is basically good to go, I see that there are > a couple of outstanding questions from Paul's 30 Oct message; sorry for missing > these... > >>>>> What the mechanism in the document should _not_ be used for is to >>>>> expand the IPFIX information model to also include the contents of all the >>>>> various MIBs, such that SMI IEs could be used alongside IPFIX IEs to export >>>>> information from non-SNMP sources of data. Otherwise we've created Yet >>>>> Another Representation for lots of common IEs already in the IPFIX IE registry, >>>>> which would significantly complicate the comparison and combination of data >>>>> at collectors. The document needs to make this explicit, either in section 1 or 2. >>>> The mechanism _can_ be used like that. >>> Can be, yes. Is it the express intention of the authors of the draft to do so? >> >> Authors aside, what does the WG want? Ultimately the goal is to avoid >> creating new IPFIX IEs for each MIB that needs exported. Does that require >> considering MIBs as part of the info model? > > So I've thought about this a bit and I *think* we agree here: this mechanism > exists so that things which are already in MIBs can be exported via IPFIX without > having to define new IEs. Exactly. > Personally, I'd be happy if we didn't start deprecating things already in the native > registry in favor of things in MIBs, Agreed; this document does not deprecate any existing IEs. - which means there are now two ways of exporting some things (as IE and as MIB). Collectors should already have architectures which understand this equivalence (effectively a presentation layer) since there are already some equivalent (duplicate) IEs (Andrew Feren had a list), and the list will surely grow as enterprise-specific IEs are transitioned to IANA. So I consider this to be a pre-existing issue which was not introduced by this document. Therefore I don't see a need to document the existing IE / MIB equivalences in the document. Please shout if you disagree. > and if the IE Doctors don't tell someone who > wants an IE that they can't have it because it's in MIB X. I think it'll be on a case-by-case basis. Hopefully they'll encourage the use of MIB export. However if the use case involves exporting lots of other IEs and no other MIBs, then a new IE would seem justified for simplicity. Remember that the point of the draft is to avoid overloading the IANA registry with new IEs which are equivalent to existing MIBs. > I don't believe it's necessary to write any of that down though. +1 > >>> Expressed another way, we've already created duplication; now we have to live with it. > >> Actually this seems to be closer to "we've already created duplication, so we can happily create more," which seems dangerous for sustainable interop. > > > > What change, if any, would you like to see in the draft? > > > As long as it's clear that the mechanism is intended to glue MIBs to IPFIX, none. Great, thanks! P. > > Cheers, > > Brian > > On 13 Dec 2014, at 00:13, Paul Aitken <paitken@Brocade.com> wrote: > > > Joel, All, > > > > I'm waiting for WG review of draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export-07 > > -principally from Brian Trammell and Juergen Schoenwaelder. > > > > P. > > > > > > From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> > > Date: 12 December 2014 at 20:05 > > Subject: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. > > To: IPFIX Working Group <ipfix@ietf.org> > > Cc: "ipfix-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <ipfix-chairs@tools.ietf.org> > > > > > > > > Greetings, > > > > The chairs and my co-AD and I have decided it's time to window down > > the ipfix working group. Our major milestones are completed and we > > should be pleased with the results. > > > > We have one remaining active document > > > > draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export > > > > which I will be happy to AD sponsor. Barring significant commentary to > > contrary I will close the working-group on friday december 19th and we > > will retain the mailing list for some time after that. > > > > Thanks and congratulations. > > Joel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > IPFIX mailing list > > IPFIX@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > IPFIX mailing list > > IPFIX@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix
- [IPFIX] Considering the circumstances under which… joel jaeggli
- Re: [IPFIX] Considering the circumstances under w… Wayne Tackabury
- [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. joel jaeggli
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Paul Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Paul Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Stewart Bryant
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Andrew Feren
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Stewart Bryant
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. joel jaeggli
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Paul Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group. Stewart Bryant