IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lmap] Feedback on draft-eardley-lmap-terminology

Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com> Wed, 24 July 2013 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <paitken@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B2D311E821B for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 08:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.413
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.413 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.185, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 2ow+VKHpMjGW for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 08:02:13 -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 B6DC911E8142 for <lmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 08:01:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3576; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1374678061; x=1375887661; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=riLioJPtXLsbO91bQtoKcpEG0NRRI54VlVlgqx8B7xQ=; b=inS1mx/tceEc0PzZ8+YbpEkL9IPQEwrWj8ubFQR00iSk8v3pZH5io2XS pjKwr4qhsdF1s/EVhKo40KhjoqZ9Gi9r2oi0EHDqdyyDnLsPhhOKj6A5t EZ67ZYAIs8QBr0QB/NBjFANJWepBkowB+xPueqgZIYNzk9XajnSsZooEh s=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.89,735,1367971200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="85061852"
Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Jul 2013 15:01:00 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6OF0wpa017826 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:00:58 GMT
Received: from [144.254.153.45] (dhcp-144-254-153-45.cisco.com [144.254.153.45]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id r6OF0vME021387; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:00:58 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <51EFEC2A.9010701@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:00:58 +0100
From: Paul Aitken <paitken@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
References: <51ED59B3.3040701@cisco.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1287FC5D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1287FC5D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060401090709060606080704"
Cc: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>, "lmap@ietf.org" <lmap@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lmap] Feedback on draft-eardley-lmap-terminology
X-BeenThere: lmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Large Scale Measurement of Access network Performance <lmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lmap>
List-Post: <mailto:lmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:02:20 -0000

Dan,

> The single controller (for a given MA) key assumption is not mentioned 
> by draft-akhter-lmap-framework. Why?

The only key assumption (in the LMAP WG charter) is "that the 
measurement system is under the control of a single organization".

Given that assumption, we don't see the necessity of restricting an MA 
to a single controller.
This allows for redundant / backup controllers, or a controller cloud 
(thinking of rserpool, eg).

P.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email