Re: [ippm] Fwd: Expiration impending: draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-metrics

Al Morton <acmorton@att.com> Wed, 18 January 2012 03:52 UTC

Return-Path: <acmorton@att.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BF4911E8080 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:52:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.521
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.275, BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kDwCyWCdNBwN for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:52:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail119.messagelabs.com (mail119.messagelabs.com [216.82.241.195]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2BB111E8076 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:52:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Env-Sender: acmorton@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-119.messagelabs.com!1326858738!8446001!1
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.145]
X-StarScan-Version: 6.4.3; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 29219 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2012 03:52:19 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp6.sbc.com (HELO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.145) by server-12.tower-119.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 18 Jan 2012 03:52:19 -0000
Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0I3qmgM009304 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:52:48 -0500
Received: from sflint02.pst.cso.att.com (sflint02.pst.cso.att.com [144.154.234.229]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0I3qhU8009282 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:52:44 -0500
Received: from alpd052.aldc.att.com (alpd052.aldc.att.com [130.8.42.31]) by sflint02.pst.cso.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:52:02 -0500
Received: from aldc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0I3q0XL011375 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:52:01 -0500
Received: from dns.maillennium.att.com (dns.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0I3ptl8011307 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:51:56 -0500
Message-Id: <201201180351.q0I3ptl8011307@alpd052.aldc.att.com>
Received: from acmt.att.com (vpn-135-70-161-148.vpn.mwst.att.com[135.70.161.148](misconfigured sender)) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with SMTP id <20120118035003gw100e4lpbe>; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 03:50:04 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [135.70.161.148]
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:52:54 -0500
To: Daniel Genin <dgenin@nist.gov>
From: Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F15FE2A.1080004@nist.gov>
References: <20120102124204.27668.58844.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F01B330.4080806@uijterwaal.nl> <201201071525.q07FPng0003596@alpd052.aldc.att.com> <4F15FE2A.1080004@nist.gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications: public
X-RSA-Action: allow
Cc: IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Fwd: Expiration impending: draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-metrics
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ippm>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 03:52:22 -0000

Thanks for your comments, Daniel.

At 06:03 PM 1/17/2012, Daniel Genin wrote:
>I. In Section 5.1.2 the bulleted list item 2 appears to suggest that 
>orthogonality of metrics is a desirable property, however, no 
>explanation for this is given. Moreover, metrics appearing in 
>Section 6 do not appear to be orthogonal suggesting that 
>orthogonality is not a necessary property. If orthogonality is a 
>desirable property in the case of delay and loss metrics but not in 
>the case of raw capacity metrics this probably needs to be clarified.

This is an interesting point, and certainly deserves clarification
as you suggest.

regards,
Al