IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group.

joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Wed, 17 December 2014 06:39 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.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 43AE41A044D for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:39:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 IeNwi7XNw4S5 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:39:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F8811A039D for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:39:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mbp.local ([IPv6:2601:9:7681:2d01:4897:9f29:74ea:535a]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id sBH6d8pr022665 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 17 Dec 2014 06:39:09 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <5491250B.9030303@bogus.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:39:07 -0800
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: stbryant@cisco.com, Andrew Feren <andrewf@plixer.com>
References: <5435D840.1090108@bogus.com> <5487A31D.5040304@bogus.com> <548B4AA0.4000905@bogus.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA5C92F0DE@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>, <548ECA8F.7030209@cisco.com> <08A9E6AF-F505-4D5D-AC9C-E35D2AF8E08D@plixer.com> <548ED9CF.8070309@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <548ED9CF.8070309@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="p7XtUf9utvUSIJ00BhsF9aijXwj2EHsnW"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/mhtXjjbXlPu-EOJp5YLJXcsR0pY
Cc: IPFIX Working Group <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: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 06:39:23 -0000

On 12/15/14 4:53 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
> On 15/12/2014 11:57, Andrew Feren wrote:
>> Are you talking about adding IEs or something more?
>>
IE's at least can be handled via expert review. if you needed new one's
for a particular application that work might be best done in connection
with the area of work requiring the IEs (as mibs or information models are).
>> If more than just new IEs can you give an example?  I've used IPFIX
>> for transport of more than just network management information. I'm
>> curious what is missing for your use cases. 
>>
>
> Well a bit off the cuff, but how about pre-registered templates rather
> than refreshed templates so that IOT devices don't need to use energy
> or bandwidth to transmit them?
>
> Are there any additional protocol considerations associated with
> privacy, authentication and resilience when IPFIX is used over the
> wide area? For example authenticated data merging?
useful food for thought.

thanks
joel
> - Stewart
>
>
>> -Andrew
>>
>> On Dec 15, 2014, at 6:47 AM, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com
>> <mailto:stbryant@cisco.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> As many of you know I have concerns about closing IPFIX.
>>>
>>> Whilst IPFIX may have completed sufficient of its work in support
>>> of network management, the protocol has much to offer in terms
>>> of use as a mass data collection protocol particularly in the IOT space.
>>> I thus have some reservations about terminating the work as
>>> opposed to moving it to another area.
>>>
>>> - Stewart
>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: IPFIX [mailto:ipfix-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of joel jaeggli
>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 10:06 PM
>>>>> To: IPFIX Working Group
>>>>> Cc: ipfix-chairs@tools.ietf.org <mailto:ipfix-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
>>>>> Subject: [IPFIX] Winding down the ipfix working group.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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 <mailto:IPFIX@ietf.org>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix
>
>
> -- 
> For corporate legal information go to:
>
> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email