Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Entities registry
Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Thu, 11 September 2014 06:32 UTC
Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.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 57D101A048E for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 23:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.152
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.152 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 1t4aNi4_mXBT for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 23:32:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BB411A01FF for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 23:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=32378; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1410417141; x=1411626741; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to; bh=vk5t/88Mq2rghHSFh/j5OHN0QZeSUFQPNitHPumjT4M=; b=aXqiX0IyfcYlPEF8jNRbhmKDdqxfNMz51bLrea6mHn3xoi5PMOx/up3U 3Hl0TuLWzfvK8qHkp6d4NLKhjqyyn2I74/4DtklTR15XN0/tOYykTlCXi GP2f0TXAfS/9Ej9LHe4nBDt+64QyLUfY8uAPVMOtGGPKDyIkm5MUbbgBI I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiwHAHRBEVStJssW/2dsb2JhbABggkeBGVeIV74XgV8BCYdNAYEgeIQDAQEBBAEBASpBChELEQQBAQEJFgEBAgQHCQMCAQIBFR8JCAYBDAYCAQEFiDkNv0gBF45rEQFWAYRMBYZOjyuHA4FfhWSEf4h3ghuBSDsvAYEOgUABAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,504,1406592000"; d="scan'208,217";a="173922226"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Sep 2014 06:32:18 +0000
Received: from [10.60.67.84] (ams-bclaise-8913.cisco.com [10.60.67.84]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s8B6WH7n021260; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:32:17 GMT
Message-ID: <541141F0.9050703@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 08:32:17 +0200
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>, Andrew Feren <andrewf@plixer.com>, "ipfix@ietf.org" <ipfix@ietf.org>
References: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B82E898@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <5410C1A7.6000509@plixer.com> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B82EA53@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <5410C5F9.9030307@plixer.com> <54113BFC.3050507@cisco.com> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B82ED47@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B82ED47@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070202020705030509030001"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/_ICpTvrS_L5UgAH-3MTE1Io_5e0
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Entities registry
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: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:32:25 -0000
Hi Gregory, > > Hi Benoit, > > I'd prefer an update to existing IEs as well. All but two IEs can > corrected by updating their Description and References. Do you think > Name of two can be updated in the same manner? > We should review if RFC 7013 allows a name change... THe IE-DOCTORS will give a definitive answer. Let me send them an email. > > Errata doesn't seem as the right way as these IEs been defined in RFC > 5102 (published January 2008). > This is not an issue. Since 7012, which updates RFC5102, IANA is the THE registry for IEs, not the RFCs any longer. The IANA "IPFIX Information Elements" registry [IANA-IPFIX <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7012#ref-IANA-IPFIX>] is the current complete reference for IPFIX Information Elements. The initial values for this registry were provided by [RFC5102 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5102>]. Regards, Benoit. > > Your suggestions greatly appreciated. > > Regards, > > Greg > > *From:*Benoit Claise [mailto:bclaise@cisco.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 10, 2014 11:07 PM > *To:* Andrew Feren; Gregory Mirsky; ipfix@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow > Information Export (IPFIX) Entities registry > > Two points: > - The EXP bits have been used for QoS mapping for years, even before > 2009 (RFC 5462 publication date) > - Do you believe that deprecating/replacing all these IEs will imply > that exporter implementations will update their code, just for new > ElementID? :-) > > I would use the procedure in > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7013#section-5.2 > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7013#section-5.2> > Something like: > OLD: > > The Label, Exp, and S fields from the label stack entry that was > pushed immediately before the label stack entry that would be reported > by mplsTopLabelStackSection. See the definition of > mplsTopLabelStackSection for further details. > > The size of this Information Element is 3 octets. > > NEW: > > The Label, Traffic Class (previously called Exp in RFC3032 > <http://www.iana.org/go/rfc3032>), and S fields from the label > stack entry that was pushed immediately before the label stack > entry that would be reported by mplsTopLabelStackSection. See the > definition of mplsTopLabelStackSection for further details. > > The size of this Information Element is 3 octets. > > And change > - the reference from RFC3032 <http://www.iana.org/go/rfc3032> to RFC5462 > - the revision +1 > > Regards, Benoit > > > > Then perhaps the right thing is to deprecate the lot and replace > them all. > > Thanks, > -Andrew > > On 09/10/2014 05:28 PM, Gregory Mirsky wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > you're right, the RFC 5462 changed the interpretation of this > field as well (section 2 Details of Change): > > *2.1* <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5462#section-2.1>*. RFC > 3032 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3032>* > > RFC 3032 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3032> states on page 4: > > 3. Experimental Use > > This three-bit field is reserved for experimental use. > > This paragraph is now changed to: > > 3. Traffic Class (TC) field > > This three-bit field is used to carry traffic class > information, > > and the change of the name is applicable to all places > it occurs > > in IETF RFCs and other IETF documents. > > Regards, > > Greg > > *From:*Andrew Feren [mailto:andrewf@plixer.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 10, 2014 2:25 PM > *To:* ipfix@ietf.org <mailto:ipfix@ietf.org> > *Cc:* Gregory Mirsky > *Subject:* Re: [IPFIX] MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Information > Export (IPFIX) Entities registry > > Hi Greg, > > On 09/10/2014 03:22 PM, Gregory Mirsky wrote: > > Dear All, > > in several places of describing MPLS Label element IEs the > registry still refers to the EXP field even though the RFC > 5462 updated RFC 3032 and renamed it "Traffic Class" (TC). > Below is the list of IEs that may benefit from updating > Description and Reference information: > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection2 > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection3 > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection4 > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection5 > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection6 > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection7 > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection8 > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection9 > > ·mplsTopLabelStackSection10 > > ·mplsTopLabelExp (should this be deprecated and > mplsTopLabelTc be created instead?) > > ·postMplsTopLabelExp (should this be deprecated and > postMplsTopLabelTc be created instead?) > > > Did 5462 change just the name from Exp to TC or did the > interpretation of the bits change? > > -Andrew > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > IPFIX mailing list > > IPFIX@ietf.org <mailto:IPFIX@ietf.org> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix >
- [IPFIX] MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Information Ex… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [IPFIX] MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Informatio… Andrew Feren
- Re: [IPFIX] MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Informatio… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Andrew Feren
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] [Ie-doctors] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Andrew Feren
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [SPAM I AM] RE: MPLS IEs in IANA's IP… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [IPFIX] MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Informatio… Paul Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] [Ie-doctors] MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Fl… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [mpls] MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Inf… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [IPFIX] [MIB-DOCTORS] [mpls] MPLS IEs in IANA… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [IPFIX] [mpls] MPLS IEs in IANA's IP Flow Inf… Loa Andersson
- Re: [IPFIX] [MIB-DOCTORS] [mpls] MPLS IEs in IANA… ietfdbh
- Re: [IPFIX] [MIB-DOCTORS] [mpls] MPLS IEs in IANA… Benoit Claise