RE: [ipfix] AD Evaluation of: draft-leinen-ipfix-eval-contrib-01.txt

"Meyer, Jeffrey D (http://usage.fc.hp.c)" <jeff.meyer2@hp.com> Mon, 22 December 2003 17:22 UTC

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [ipfix] AD Evaluation of: draft-leinen-ipfix-eval-contrib-01.txt
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:08:29 -0800
Message-ID: <A747B346BDCCAB45831C24F0CD7C7F09177CF4@cacexc03.americas.cpqcorp.net>
Thread-Topic: [ipfix] AD Evaluation of: draft-leinen-ipfix-eval-contrib-01.txt
Thread-Index: AcPIrcyo6P6/25PARJOkh+UpJ96hrgAADqZA
From: "Meyer, Jeffrey D (http://usage.fc.hp.c)" <jeff.meyer2@hp.com>
To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, "'Ipfix Wg' (E-mail) (E-mail)" <ipfix@net.doit.wisc.edu>
Cc: simon@limmat.switch.ch
Precedence: bulk
Sender: majordomo listserver <majordomo@mil.doit.wisc.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Bert,

  In answer to your very last question.  NDM-U 3.1.1 is available at the
following URL:

  http://www.ipdr.org/documents/NDM-U_3.1.1.pdf

Regards,

  Jeff Meyer

-----Original Message-----
From: majordomo listserver [mailto:majordomo@mil.doit.wisc.edu]On Behalf
Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 8:47 AM
To: 'Ipfix Wg' (E-mail) (E-mail)
Cc: 'simon@limmat.switch.ch'
Subject: [ipfix] AD Evaluation of:
draft-leinen-ipfix-eval-contrib-01.txt


Serious questions:
- Many of the documents for the protcools that were evaluated 
  are (possibly expired or soon to expire) internet-drafts.
  Are you sure they are just informative and that there is no
  need to read them in order to understand the evaluation?
  Possibly they are not needed (I think I can see that after
  reading the whol draft). It might be good to make an explicit
  statement at the end of section 1 to say that you have extracted
  the relevant information from the evaluation drafts and that
  the detailed content of those drafts is not needed to understand 
  this summary/executive/consolidated evaluation document.

- Anyway, 
  - I see that some have made it to RFC. 
    RFC3423 - draft-kzhang-crane-protocol-05.txt
    RFC3588 - draft-ietf-aaa-diameter-17.txt
  - These are still there as (very old) drafts
    draft-kzhang-ipfix-eval-crane-00.txt
    draft-zander-ipfix-diameter-eval-00.txt
    draft-calato-ipfix-lfap-eval-00.txt
    draft-bclaise-netflow-9-00.txt
  - I do not see/find:
    expired: draft-riverstone-lfap-01.txt
    expired: draft-riverstone-lfap-data-01.txt
    expired: draft-claise-ipfix-eval-netflow-04.txt
  And so on.
- 6.  Security Considerations
    The security mechanisms of the candidate protocols were discussed in
    the section about the Security requirement (6.3.2).
  I think it would be good to make a reference here to the doc that 
  contains that sect 6.3.2 !! And porbably you mean sect 6.3.3. in
  the ipfix requirements doc anyway!

Nits and admin comments

- abstract speaks about "this draft", you man "this document"
  draft dioes not read so well when it is an RFC.
- first sentence in sect 4.1 missing right parenthesis
- sect 4.10.3.2 3rd line: s/evel/level/
- ANy idea, where reference [NDM-U-3.1] can be obtained/accessed?
  

Thanks,
Bert 

--
Help        mailto:majordomo@net.doit.wisc.edu and say "help" in message body
Unsubscribe mailto:majordomo@net.doit.wisc.edu and say
"unsubscribe ipfix" in message body
Archive     http://ipfix.doit.wisc.edu/archive/

--
Help        mailto:majordomo@net.doit.wisc.edu and say "help" in message body
Unsubscribe mailto:majordomo@net.doit.wisc.edu and say
"unsubscribe ipfix" in message body
Archive     http://ipfix.doit.wisc.edu/archive/

[ipfix] AD Evaluation of: draft-leinen-ipfix-eval… Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
RE: [ipfix] AD Evaluation of: draft-leinen-ipfix-… Meyer, Jeffrey D (http://usage.fc.hp.c)
[ipfix] Re: AD Evaluation of: draft-leinen-ipfix-… Simon Leinen