RE: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IETF, Minneapolis
"Tal Givoly" <givoly@xacct.com> Mon, 10 November 2003 23:37 UTC
Received: from mil.doit.wisc.edu (mil.doit.wisc.edu [128.104.31.31]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA22772 for <ipfix-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:37:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordomo by mil.doit.wisc.edu with local (Exim 3.13 #1) id 1AJLPI-0003aV-00 for ipfix-list@mil.doit.wisc.edu; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:25:16 -0600
Received: from usmail.xacct.com ([204.253.100.12]) by mil.doit.wisc.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1) id 1AJLPH-0003aP-00 for ipfix@net.doit.wisc.edu; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:25:15 -0600
Received: from Givoly (inside.us.xacct.com [204.253.100.102]) by usmail.xacct.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id hAANYPC17317; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:34:34 -0800
From: Tal Givoly <givoly@xacct.com>
To: plonka@doit.wisc.edu, ipfix@net.doit.wisc.edu
Subject: RE: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IETF, Minneapolis
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:24:20 -0800
Message-ID: <DLEIIIOHMNPJPNMKGEFDAEOGEDAA.givoly@xacct.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <20031110162639.A4160@doit.wisc.edu>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Precedence: bulk
Sender: majordomo listserver <majordomo@mil.doit.wisc.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dave, Counter looks good in RFC1065, but the term "integer" that was used in IPFIX context is not equivalent to GAUGE. Integers in IPFIX context, or "Delta" value is a non-negative integer that is representative of the absolute difference in value of a theoretical counter between one record and the other. I say theoretical counter because no counter needs to actually exist - what delta value reports are the number of <something> that were observed/measured since the last report. <something> could be octets, packets, frames, time units, etc. I'm also unsure about the term "application wide" as although a counter or a gauge are common to all observers, delta values are not common to all observers (so if an exporter/meter is sending to multiple destinations, it may have different delta values for each destination and there is no commonly agreed upon, application wide, value - unless it is imposed that the records are identical for all recipients). Tal -----Original Message----- From: majordomo listserver [mailto:majordomo@mil.doit.wisc.edu]On Behalf Of Dave Plonka Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 2:27 PM To: ipfix@net.doit.wisc.edu Cc: Tal Givoly; Benoit Claise Subject: Re: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IETF, Minneapolis Hi Tal, On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 01:34:54PM -0800, Tal Givoly wrote: > Dave, > > > 1) Both counters and integers are needed in the information model. > > (Here, by integer we mean an absolute value a la SNMP.) > > I wasn't in the meeting, but I believe your parenthesis should be the > opposite. "counters" represent the SNMP-like behavior whereas "integers" > refers to the delta between the previous record and the next record. I also > believe that the term "integer" is misleading as the counter itself is also > an integer (however one that may or may not have a wrapping/overflow > behavior). You're right... I see now that that is true even in SNMP, so my parentesized qualification is insufficient. > Perhaps the term "delta" would more appropriate? OK, I'll clarify it. I think instead of counter and integer, we should say "counter" and "gauge". These terms are defined in section 3.2.1 of RFC1065 ("http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1065.txt"): 3.2.3.3. Counter This application-wide type represents a non-negative integer which monotonically increases until it reaches a maximum value, when it wraps around and starts increasing again from zero. This memo specifies a maximum value of 2^32-1 (4294967295 decimal) for counters. 3.2.3.4. Gauge This application-wide type represents a non-negative integer, which may increase or decrease, but which latches at a maximum value. This memo specifies a maximum value of 2^32-1 (4294967295 decimal) for gauges. Thanks, Dave -- plonka@doit.wisc.edu http://net.doit.wisc.edu/~plonka ARS:N9HZF Madison, WI -- 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] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IETF, M… Dave Plonka
- Re: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Dave Plonka
- Re: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Benoit Claise
- RE: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Tal Givoly
- Re: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Dave Plonka
- RE: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Tal Givoly
- RE: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Natale, Robert C (Bob)
- Re: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Benoit Claise
- Re: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Nevil Brownlee
- RE: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Carter Bullard
- RE: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Tal Givoly
- RE: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… MEYER,JEFFREY D (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
- Re: [ipfix] DRAFT IPFIX meeting minutes, 58th IET… Pratap Pereira
- [ipfix] Forming consensus on IPFIX default protoc… Nevil Brownlee
- Re: [ipfix] Forming consensus on IPFIX default pr… Sebastian Zander
- Re: [ipfix] Forming consensus on IPFIX default pr… Martin Horneffer