Re: [ippm] traceroute as WG work item?

The I-D is still missing a data model, because there is no
consensus yet on the mailing list about whether to use an
XML-based data model or a more compact one.
Please find some pro and con arguments at
http://people.internet2.edu/~matt/IPPM/Meetings/ietf62/ippm-2005-03-07-traceroute.pdf

Thanks,

    Juergen

--On 15.03.2005 11:15 +0100 Juergen Quittek wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Unfortunately, there was no discussion on traceroute storage during
> our last meeting. Therefore I bring this issue to the mailing list.
>
> There is an I-D describing an information model for traceroute records:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-niccolini-ippm-storetraceroutes-00.txt
>
> This work was initiated by the development of a database for traffic
> measurement tools and traces, see  http://www.ist-mome.org/database/
>
> Currently, there is no standard way of exchanging traceroute
> measurements except for the DISMAN-TRACEROUTE-MIB module (RFC2925).
> But this can only be used for transferring measurement data from an
> SNMP agent to its manager(s).  It is not useful for exchange between
> traffic measurement tools.
>
> A standardized record format for traceroute measurements would be
> very useful for building tools, databases and other applications
> that handle traceroute measurements and need to exchange them.
>
> Therefore I propose that this becomes an IPPM WG work item.
> Any comment, pro or con, is very welcome.
>
> Thanks,
>
>     Juergen
> --
> Juergen Quittek        quittek@netlab.nec.de       Tel: +49 6221 90511-15
> NEC Europe Ltd.,       Network Laboratories        Fax: +49 6221 90511-55
> Kurfuersten-Anlage 36, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany   http://www.netlab.nec.de
>
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> ippm@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm

_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org 
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm