[ippm] re IPPM MIB
"Yves Cognet" <yves@qosmetrics.net> Wed, 15 September 2004 14:10 UTC
Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA05628 for <ippm-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 10:10:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C7aIE-0000a0-2a; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 09:57:54 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C6tdh-00049W-Lc for ippm@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:25:13 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14195 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:25:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [69.84.11.62] (helo=mail.qosmetrics.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C6tiQ-0003tH-5i for ippm@ietf.org; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:30:06 -0400
Received: (qmail 23912 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2004 16:24:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO yves) (82.127.31.196) by bugs.internal.qosmetrics.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2004 16:24:59 -0000
Message-ID: <001401c499ae$14853550$8401a8c0@yves>
From: Yves Cognet <yves@qosmetrics.net>
To: henk.uijterwaal@ripe.net
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 18:23:57 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++)
X-Scan-Signature: 5011df3e2a27abcc044eaa15befcaa87
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 09:57:52 -0400
Cc: ippm@ietf.org
Subject: [ippm] re IPPM MIB
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Yves Cognet <yves@qosmetrics.net>
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org >
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org ?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org >
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org ?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org ?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1861576417=="
Sender: ippm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ippm-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Henk Please find enclosed my comments for point 1 - synchronisation accuracy (that lays to metrics accuracy) - NTP, GPS, ... (event notification if accuracy level is bad) - aggregation of metrics ( with a high level of accuracy - not a "ping" every 15 minutes !), aggregation will results in lower network burden - alarm notification on thresholds attached to pertinent metrics - one view of metrics per user ( how you can manage user SLA and QoS over VPN ) - capacity to register new metrics (even proprietary) in the IPPM registry - capacity to cover all IP transport protocols.(UDP, TCP and above applications HTTP,RTP,..) - capacity to see test configuration regards Yves Cognet ----- Original Message ----- From: <ippm-request@ietf.org> To: <ippm@ietf.org> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 6:14 PM Subject: ippm Digest, Vol 3, Issue 8 > Send ippm mailing list submissions to > ippm@ietf.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > ippm-request@ietf.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > ippm-owner@ietf.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of ippm digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. IPPM MIB (Henk Uijterwaal (RIPE NCC)) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:43:18 +0200 (CEST) > From: "Henk Uijterwaal (RIPE NCC)" <henk@ripe.net> > Subject: [ippm] IPPM MIB > To: ippm@ietf.org > Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0408161042590.27592@x49.ripe.net> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > IPPM group, > > Since the IPPM WG meeting in Seoul, there have been several discussions > (both public and private) between Emile Stephan, Andy Bierman (the IPPM > MIB technical advisor), the chairs of the WG and several others, on how to > proceed with the IPPM MIB document (draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-mib-06.txt). > This mail summarizes the discussions and proposes a way forward. > > We all agree that even though the current draft is in its 6th iteration, > there has been very little feedback from the WG on its contents. The > chairs did receive some informal comments on the document, these can be > summarized as "the document and MIB are too complex". > > A proposal has been made to for a simpler approach, based on a ring buffer > to store individual measurements. While this looked nice in theory, in > practice it is probably not possible to store and retrieve individual > measurements in a MIB at a rate of the order of 1Hz or more. In other > words, a MIB can only be used to report aggregate information, where the > aggregation is done either on demand or by default at regular intervals. > > As the next steps, we propose: > > 1. The mailing list will be asked to provide feedback on the question > what information they would like to see in the management interface > of a network measurement system. (See below). > > 2. When there is consensus on this question, we will look at existing > MIB's (in particular the RMONMIB TPM-MIB) to see what is > already there to satisfy the requirements generated in the previous > step and what has to be defined in our group. > > 3. The existing document will be rewritten to define whatever has to be > defined and nothing more. > > If there is little or no feedback on step 1, we will conclude that there > is no interest in an IPPM at the moment. In that case, the existing > document will be finished and a published as an informational RFC. > > To start, the first questions we would like to see answered, are: > > * What information would you like to see in a management interface of a > measurement system? > * What action would you like to take with a management interface of a > measurement system? > * Do you have requests from the users of your implementation of the > IPPM metrics for an interface between the measurement system and > a network management system (NMS)? > > Please note the constraint mentioned above. It also should be noted that > some of the IPPM metrics implementations do not use a MIB but do report > aggregated information in other formats (CSV, XML, graphical, ...) This > is information that could (potentially) be reported in a MIB as well. > > We invite everybody to comment on both the procedure and the questions > above before September 30, > > Henk > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net > RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk > P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 > 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 > The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Process and Procedure are the last hiding place of people without the wit > and wisdom to do their job properly. (David Brent). > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ippm mailing list > ippm@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm > > > End of ippm Digest, Vol 3, Issue 8 > **********************************
_______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
- [ippm] re IPPM MIB Yves Cognet