Re: [OPSAWG] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-06

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Mon, 16 April 2018 04:00 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA108126B6D; Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6EeETSC_zRH8; Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77A001204DA; Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1f7vJd-0005Xe-Co; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 04:00:29 +0000
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:00:28 -0700
Message-ID: <m2d0yzol5v.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com>, heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>, li zhenqiang <li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community.all@ietf.org>, opsawg <opsawg@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F21A6D62DC8@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <152363066886.26321.3212300538180273898@ietfa.amsl.com> <HKXPR0601MB1799868866AF89F9699EAF28FCB10@HKXPR0601MB1799.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com> <20180415160956.GC66082@shrubbery.net> <ace47a71-0e9d-6a0d-ae37-1f4bc48ada0b@stevecrocker.com> <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F21A6D62DC8@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/25.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/HcBvci307q58Q7xMiwVqkXwiof8>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-06
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 04:00:38 -0000

> As far as I can see, this document proposed a new aggregation
> parameter for IPFIX. So that the operators can get the traffic
> statistic from a new dimension.
>
> Because "Flow information based on IP address or IP prefix may provide
> much too fine granularity for a large network. On the contrary, flow
> information based on AS number may be too coarse."
>
> It sounds reasonable.

iff i can select which community's or communities' values form the
sampling bucket(s), this seems reasonable.  if i am community
transparent, i probably don't want a bucket for each community on my
inbound set.

randy