Re: [sip-clf] Changes to proposed charter based on discussion in Stockholm

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Fri, 21 August 2009 14:45 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: sip-clf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-clf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DD593A6DC3 for <sip-clf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 07:45:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.865
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.865 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.135, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F6MXVBvgpG4V for <sip-clf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 07:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 555823A68DB for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 07:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.2] (pool-173-71-46-184.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.71.46.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7LEjeNq060171 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:45:41 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
Message-Id: <47E27FB7-6E69-43B3-B6EB-29858ACAFCBE@nostrum.com>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
To: Vijay Gurbani <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A8DECCE.2060201@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:45:40 -0500
References: <3D468AF5-7257-42D8-8F20-B619E04D648F@nostrum.com> <4A8DC962.3090200@alcatel-lucent.com> <0CF4A43B-EE03-4220-A972-777138DCDC20@nostrum.com> <4A8DECCE.2060201@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 173.71.46.184 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: sip-clf@ietf.org, theo zourzouvillys <theo@voip.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [sip-clf] Changes to proposed charter based on discussion in Stockholm
X-BeenThere: sip-clf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Common Log File format discussion list <sip-clf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-clf>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-clf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 14:45:39 -0000

Yes, you're right. But see below:

On Aug 20, 2009, at 7:39 PM, Vijay Gurbani wrote:

> Robert Sparks wrote:
>> Thanks for looking at this Vijay.
>> Your suggestion negates exactly what the text was trying to say  
>> though.
>
> Robert: Then I am confused.  More inline.
>
>> The word "diverse" was there on purpose. I've heard an expectation  
>> from
>> the conversation so far to be able to merge records from several  
>> different
>> elements on the path of a request (multiple proxies, and  
>> potentially both
>> (even several) endpoints, and do something sensible, like answer  
>> "what
>> happened with this request".
>
> Sure, but that is what the *second* bullet item is covering, is it  
> not?
> Namely,
>
>  * the need to correlate messages from multiple elements
>    related to a given request (that may fork) or a
>    given dialog.
>
> This is what allows folks to correlate a request across multiple
> elements using something akin to Hadriel's session-id draft.
>
> The first bullet covers cases where a proxy may want to create
> a search tree of forked requests, or where a proxy's administrator
> wants to do some trend analysis on a the proxy's log file.  The
> first bullet also covers the case where a user wants to do some
> analysis on his or her UA's local log file.
And a site administrator may want to merge multiple logs from
a series of proxies and app-servers and run that same trend
analysis.

The text as written does not preclude performing these operations
on data from a single element. Are you wanting to restrict it to
only data from one element? Or are you just trying to make sure the
from-one-element case is covered?




>
> Thanks,
>
> - vijay
> -- 
> Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
> 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
> Email: vkg@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org}
> WWW:   http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg