Re: [IPFIX] revising IPFIX IES 281 and 282

Andrew Feren <andrewf@plixer.com> Fri, 14 September 2012 20:35 UTC

Return-Path: <andrewf@plixer.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 6644A21F8567 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:35:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_37=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BBtG++QTwiDP for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:35:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.plixer.com (smtp.plixer.com [66.186.184.193]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DD0D21F8566 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:35:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.100.1.132] ([10.100.1.132]) by smtp.plixer.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:35:40 -0400
Message-ID: <5053951B.5090108@plixer.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:35:39 -0400
From: Andrew Feren <andrewf@plixer.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:18.0) Gecko/18.0 Thunderbird/18.0a1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com>
References: <505385B4.9010108@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <505385B4.9010108@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010109010000040208060101"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Sep 2012 20:35:40.0187 (UTC) FILETIME=[8123FEB0:01CD92B8]
Cc: IETF IPFIX Working Group <ipfix@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] revising IPFIX IES 281 and 282
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: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 20:35:42 -0000

At the very least I would think the references should be in the 
references field.

Probably applies equally to IEs: 46, 101, 208, 281, 282, 304, 361, 362, 
368, 369

46, 208, 368, 369 puts the reference in the description and references.  
The others in the above list have references only in the description.  
All other IEs have any references in the references field.

I also noticed that there is a mixed bag of links I can click on and 
text URLs that I need to copy and past.

As for removing NAT64 from the description my initial reaction is that 
it is a good idea.

-Andrew

On 09/14/2012 03:29 PM, Paul Aitken wrote:
> Dear experts,
>
>
> I propose to request that IANA modify IEs 281 and 282 to remove 
> "NAT64" from their descriptions, to make them generic 
> post-NAT-IPv6-adddress fields per their names.
> And also take the opportunity to update 
> "draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-xlate-stateful-12" to RFC6146.
>
> ie, removing the text in *red* below, and adding the text in *green*.
>
> Perhaps we should add some other NAT RFCs, or entirely remove the last 
> sentence, "See ... for specification" ?
>
> Support? Feedback? Objections?
>
> Thanks,
> P.
>
>
> 281    postNATSourceIPv6Address    ipv6Address    current
>
>           The definition of this Information Element is identical to
>           the definition of Information Element 'sourceIPv6Address', 
> except that
>           it reports a modified value caused by a *NAT64* middlebox 
> function after
>           the packet passed the Observation Point.
>
>           See [RFC2460] for the definition of the Source Address field 
> in the IPv6
>           header. See [RFC3234] for the definition of middleboxes. See
> *http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-xlate-stateful-12* 
> *RFC6146* for
>           nat64 specification.
>
>
> 282    postNATDestinationIPv6Address    ipv6Address    current
>
>           The definition of this Information Element is identical to
>           the definition of Information Element 
> 'destinationIPv6Address', except
>           that it reports a modified value caused by a *NAT64* 
> middlebox function
>           after the packet passed the Observation Point.
>
>           See [RFC2460] for the definition of the Destination Address 
> field in the
>           IPv6 header. See [RFC3234] for the definition of 
> middleboxes. See
> *http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-xlate-stateful-12* 
> *RFC6146* for
>           nat64 specification.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPFIX mailing list
> IPFIX@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix