[IPFIX] Fwd: [ippm] Performance Metrics Registry: new draft
Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Wed, 17 July 2013 08:58 UTC
Return-Path: <bclaise@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 1B22021F9DBA for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 01:58:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.334
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.334 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.264, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 dBK5rNz2P6+r for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 01:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from av-tac-rtp.cisco.com (av-tac-rtp.cisco.com [64.102.19.209]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B3821F9D38 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 01:58:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from rooster.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-rtp.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r6H8wh88015453 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 04:58:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.60.67.87] (ams-bclaise-8916.cisco.com [10.60.67.87]) by rooster.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r6H8wgBo017617 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 04:58:42 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <51E65CC2.7000904@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:58:42 +0200
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "ipfix@ietf.org" <ipfix@ietf.org>
References: <51E41F08.4060407@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <51E41F08.4060407@cisco.com>
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <51E41F08.4060407@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080501080908070208030507"
Subject: [IPFIX] Fwd: [ippm] Performance Metrics Registry: new draft
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: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:58:48 -0000
Dear all, Your feedback is welcome regarding this draft. The connection with the IPFIX registry is mentioned. Regards, Benoit -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ippm] Performance Metrics Registry: new draft Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 18:10:48 +0200 From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> To: IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org> Dear all, Let me introduce http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-claise-ippm-perf-metric-registry/ This draft creates of a new IANA registry, for performance metrics that follows the RFC6390 template. And, let's not forget that the IPPM charter mentions: "Metric definitions will follow the template given in RFC 6390." Thanks Brian for giving me 10 min to present this draft. Regards, Benoit. _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
- [IPFIX] Fwd: [ippm] Performance Metrics Registry:… Benoit Claise