[ipfix] Draft agenda for Minneapolis IETF

Nevil Brownlee <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz> Tue, 28 October 2003 04:58 UTC

Message-ID: <1067315401.0fd0ced64513a@hotlava.auckland.ac.nz>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 17:30:01 +1300
From: Nevil Brownlee <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz>
To: ipfix@net.doit.wisc.edu
Subject: [ipfix] Draft agenda for Minneapolis IETF
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 4.0-cvs
Precedence: bulk
Sender: majordomo listserver <majordomo@mil.doit.wisc.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

IPFIX Agenda for IETF 58, Minneapolis
-------------------------------------

The IPFIX WG meeting is scheduled for Monday 9 Nov 03
at 0900 (first session Monday morning)

minutes

 5  1) Agenda Review

    2) Requirements draft, Juergen Quittek
       (status as at 28 Oct 03: waiting for IESG feedback on anonymisation)
10       draft-ietf-ipfix-reqs-11.txt

    3) New drafts - brief overview presentation for each, 
       discussion of as-yet-unwritten sections and unresolved issues.
       The drafts are
15      * draft-ietf-ipfix-arch-02.txt
15      * draft-ietf-ipfix-info-01.txt
15      * draft-ietf-ipfix-protocol-01.txt
15      * draft-ietf-ipfix-as-01.txt

    4) Short Presentations
        * IPFIX Vendor Specific Information Elements (dor IPFIX and PSAMP)
15          draft-bryant-ipfix-vendor-ie-00.txt


    5) Discussion: IPFIX transport and Congestion Control
45       The IPFIX charter clearly says "must run over a congestion-aware
         transport protocol."  So far we have identified SCTP and TCP
         as suitable transport protocols, with both being discussed in 
         the IPFIX protocol draft.  We need to select a default transport,
         i.e. one wich will be 'mandatory to implement.'

         This will be an open-mike . search for consensus discussion,
         be prepared to make compelling *technical* arguments.

         Also, maybe we should recognise that there will be situations
         which any chosen default may not be the 'most suitable,' i.e.
         vendors can implement other protocols besides the default.

         Note that there's no question of IPFIX being limited to any
         one transport protocol.
  
 5  6) Review of WG Milestones

 5  7) Anything else

If you have other items you'd like to see discussed, please advise
the WG chairs, by email to ipfix-chairs@net.doit.wisc.edu

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   Nevil Brownlee                   Director, Technology Development
   Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941     ITSS, The University of Auckland
   FAX: +64 9 373 7021      Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through University of Auckland
http://www.auckland.ac.nz/

--
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] Draft agenda for Minneapolis IETF Nevil Brownlee