Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-06.txt
Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com> Fri, 27 May 2011 12:52 UTC
Return-Path: <paitken@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 1D0C2E0671 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 May 2011 05:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 tYiBCx3aSLyM for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 May 2011 05:52:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FA75E0679 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 May 2011 05:52:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=paitken@cisco.com; l=5966; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1306500734; x=1307710334; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HHhf1oqhdhLi4EB8jmFL/BbNhiH27u3dtuMYSItysP0=; b=ZnFOcw+s6/yVU+pVspqtMqsy/7gAYt9u535svtCx+rtbzn2PzOfnt/Kz RUq5fAD6jWwNKTostlU4WgYUvQy8SW0SGdafpUk98deVwloPQ/ibfT1uT eiLg/9r3QH4ylq/R+m4VwFaczMNe+NZt6qQGoLIuc8gJMsvffdmgf/Vnz 8=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,280,1304294400"; d="scan'208";a="32611549"
Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 May 2011 12:52:13 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.71.48]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p4RCq84g020600; Fri, 27 May 2011 12:52:08 GMT
Received: from [10.55.89.56] (dhcp-10-55-89-56.cisco.com [10.55.89.56]) by cisco.com (8.11.7p3+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id p4RCq2u22095; Fri, 27 May 2011 13:52:02 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <4DDF9E66.7080907@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 13:51:50 +0100
From: Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian Trammell <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
References: <20110523092128.18082.9981.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <804B13F8F3D94A4AB18B9B01ACB68FA1044F55B0@EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <4DDF7F20.1000004@cisco.com> <3474FB4B-5E2C-4D7F-99C3-78D793957941@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
In-Reply-To: <3474FB4B-5E2C-4D7F-99C3-78D793957941@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: ipfix@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-06.txt
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, 27 May 2011 12:52:19 -0000
Brian, The flow count in field #3 follows the same semantics as the octet count in field #1 and the packet count in field #2. We use it internally in our "top talkers" feature to count the number of aggregated flows, though we don't currently export it. As to the terminology issue: a "flow" is the set of packets which are observed at the input to the metering process, while a "flow record" is the output from the metering process. I look forward to finding out what "Flow Entries" are :-) P. On 27/05/11 12:11, Brian Trammell wrote: > Hi, Benoit, > > I disagree, I think, for two reasons. > > First, if IE3 is defined with parallel semantics to IE1 and IE2 (octet and packet delta count), it should provide _delta_ count, not _total_ count, semantics (i.e., subsequent exports are a delta from last export, not a replacement value). > > Second, this is an IE with a much more restricted semantic meaning; it refers to Flow Entries (a new bit of flow selection terminology, the difference between which and "Flow" and "Flow Record" is still a bit unclear to me) that are given as _input_ to a (undefined but I presume contextually resolvable) Flow Selection Process. > > This is somewhat different than the Flow analog of Packet and Octet Delta Count. > > (However, if IE3 was _not_ defined by Cisco with this in mind, and really means "the total number of flows seen at the (Metering Process or analogue) _before_ flow processing", objection withdrawn.) > > Best regards, > > Brian > > On May 27, 2011, at 12:38 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: > >> Dear Tanja, >> >> One quick remark (a thorough review should follow) regarding this I.E. >> >> 7.5. fsFlowEntryTotalCount >> >> Description: >> >> This Information Element specifies the current number of all Flow >> Entries that form the parent population as input to the Flow >> Selection Process. >> >> Abstract Data Type: unsigned64 >> >> ElementId: TBD5 >> >> Status: Proposed >> >> Units: Flow Entries >> >> >> In Cisco, years ago, we have defined the I.E. #3 with the same concept. It is used when we do router-based aggregation, which is exported with NetFlow version 8. It represents the number of flow that we're given as input to the router-based aggregation process. >> See http://www.cisco.com/en/US/technologies/tk648/tk362/technologies_white_paper09186a00800a3db9_ps6601_Products_White_Paper.html (which btw, we're busy updating) >> >> So this TBD5 should be 3. Does it make sense? >> >> Regards, Benoit. >>> Hi all, >>> >>> we worked on a major revision of the flow selection draft and just submitted a new version (see below). Among other changes we now provide a much improved classification of methods, which is more consistent with the PSAMP packet selection documents. >>> Many thanks to all who provided comments. >>> >>> Changes: >>> - Flow recording process removed >>> - Clarification of difference between flow selection and packet selection >>> - Distinguished flow filtering and flow sampling similar to PSAMP >>> - Flow selection in the metering process either before aggregation or after aggregation >>> - Integrated Flow-state dependent packet selection >>> - Supporting arbitrary key space subsets with property match flow filtering >>> - Removed timestamp IEs for reporting >>> - Mediator integrated in first picture >>> - Configuration parameters and IEs redefined and re-named >>> - Many rewording, shortened several paragraphs to improve readability >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Tanja >>> >>> >>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>> Von: ipfix-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipfix-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von internet-drafts@ietf.org >>> Gesendet: Montag, 23. Mai 2011 11:21 >>> An: i-d-announce@ietf.org >>> Cc: ipfix@ietf.org >>> Betreff: [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-06.txt >>> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IP Flow Information Export Working Group of the IETF. >>> >>> Title : Flow Selection Techniques >>> Author(s) : Salvatore D'Antonio >>> Tanja Zseby >>> Christian Henke >>> Lorenzo Peluso >>> Filename : draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-06.txt >>> Pages : 25 >>> Date : 2011-05-23 >>> >>> Flow selection is the process of selecting a subset of flows from all >>> flows observed at an observation point. Flow selection reduces the >>> effort of post-processing flow data and transferring flow records. >>> This document describes motivations for flow selection and presents >>> flow selection techniques. It provides an information model for >>> configuring flow selection techniques and discusses what information >>> about a flow selection process should be exported. >>> >>> >>> >>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-06.txt >>> >>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>> >>> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: >>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-06.txt >>> _______________________________________________ >>> IPFIX mailing list >>> IPFIX@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix >>> _______________________________________________ >>> IPFIX mailing list >>> IPFIX@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix >> _______________________________________________ >> IPFIX mailing list >> IPFIX@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix > _______________________________________________ > IPFIX mailing list > IPFIX@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix
- [IPFIX] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selecti… internet-drafts
- [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-sel… Zseby, Tanja
- [IPFIX] New WG Last Call for draft-ietf-ipfix-flo… Nevil Brownlee
- Re: [IPFIX] New WG Last Call for draft-ietf-ipfix… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow… Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow… Paul Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow… Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] New WG Last Call for draft-ietf-ipfix… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow… Paul Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] WG: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipfix-flow… Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] New WG Last Call fordraft-ietf-ipfix-… Zseby, Tanja
- Re: [IPFIX] New WG Last Call fordraft-ietf-ipfix-… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] New WG Last Call fordraft-ietf-ipfix-… Gerhard Muenz