Re: [PMOL] Proposed Adoption of draft-malas-performance-metrics-08
Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> Fri, 01 February 2008 04:35 UTC
Return-Path: <pmol-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-pmol-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-pmol-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E32328C0D7; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:35:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S7zJHcB4VtaW; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:35:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7785428C11D; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:35:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: pmol@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pmol@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E765828C11D for <pmol@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:35:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oBjhEZfWT5-O for <pmol@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:35:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE4728C0D7 for <pmol@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:35:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2008 20:37:00 -0800
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m114b0I9029638 for <pmol@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:37:00 -0800
Received: from [192.168.4.177] (sjc-fluffy-vpn1.cisco.com [10.25.236.82]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with SMTP id m114b0qX000745 for <pmol@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 04:37:00 GMT
Message-Id: <D2AD8CDE-6EA2-4E94-BA46-025EE5305899@cisco.com>
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: pmol@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <200801231528.m0NFSn6k017415@alph001.aldc.att.com>
Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:36:39 -0800
References: <200801231528.m0NFSn6k017415@alph001.aldc.att.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915)
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; );
Subject: Re: [PMOL] Proposed Adoption of draft-malas-performance-metrics-08
X-BeenThere: pmol@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Performance Metrics at Other Layers <pmol.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol>, <mailto:pmol-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/pmol>
List-Post: <mailto:pmol@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pmol-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol>, <mailto:pmol-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: pmol-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pmol-bounces@ietf.org
Hi, I'd like to make a few comments - some in my role as one of the RAI ADs and some just as an individual contributor. With my AD hat on, This draft was bounced around several places before we figured out a good place to get this work done. I worked with Dan in his OPs AD role and with the chairs of the related WGs to try and determine where we wanted this work to happen. We came to the conclusion that this was the best WG to do the work in. Now that does not mean the IETF has to do this work at all, but if we are going to do it, I think this is the right place to do it. I know that multiple people in the RAI area expressed their opinions that this work was worth doing. Of course I want the work to meet the quality level expected by this WG - that was part of the reasons Dan and I believed this group was the best place to do the work. I would expect that would mean evolving this draft to be consistent with the framework document as they both get closer to WGLC. This evolution certainly could be done after the draft was adopted as a WG document. I don't think the WG has to finish the framework document before they can adopt this and start doing work - both can happen in parallel if the WG choices to do that. The important thing to me is that when this WG sends the drafts to IESG, the WG has consensus that they are of adequate quality and consistency that they should be published as RFCs. I note that we IETF Last Called the charter text that has 2. A proof-of-concept RFC defining performance metrics for SIP, based on draft-malas-performance-metrics. This memo would serve as an example of the framework and the PMOL development process in the IETF. and I don't believe I received any comments about this not being a good starting point. From a RAI point of view, I don't claim to know what is the best starting document to get this work done but the RAI folks would like to see some of the issues this draft addresses described in some RFC. WIth my individual contributor hat on, Of all the proposed drafts that this WG could adopted to meet it milestones, this one seems to be the best :-) I support adopting it as a WG item. I'm sure I don't know what needs to change to make it "right" but once it is a WG draft instead of an individual draft, whatever the consensus of the WG is can get put into this draft. I think this will be the fastest path to finishing the work and having people agree on it. Thanks, Cullen On Jan 23, 2008, at 7:28 AM, Al Morton wrote: > PMOL Working Group: > > A comment period for the Internet-Draft on > > "SIP End-to-End Performance Metrics" > > <draft-malas-performance-metrics-08.txt> > > will be open from 23 January 2008 through 6 February 2003. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-malas-performance-metrics-08 > > The purpose of this comment period is to examine whether there is > PMOL WG > consensus to adopt this draft as the basis for the SIP Performance > Metrics > "Proof of Concept" work item described in the PMOL WG Charter, > http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/pmol-charter.html > and if so to progress this as a Working Group Draft. > > > STATUS > > When this topic was raised at the IETF-70 PMOL session, there > was substantial readership and some support expressed to take-up > this version as the WG draft. There were also some > reservations expressed at the meeting about how well > the current draft matches the (evolving and not yet complete) > framework draft. Thus, completing this milestone will require > further development of the framework (and process) draft, as well. > > Also, this draft has enjoyed interest and review of the SIPPING WG, > and members of the SIP development community continue to apply > their expertise to fine-tune the performance metric definitions. > > Please weigh-in with any comments to this list or to the co-chairs: > <acmorton@att.com> and <alan@telchemy.com>. > > Al Morton > Alan Clark > pmol co-chairs > > Note: The current version of the framework and process draft is here: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-morton-perf-metrics-framework-01 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PMOL mailing list > PMOL@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol _______________________________________________ PMOL mailing list PMOL@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol
- [PMOL] Proposed Adoption of draft-malas-performan… Al Morton
- Re: [PMOL] Proposed Adoption of draft-malas-perfo… Cullen Jennings