Re: [sip-clf] Extend Charter to Include IPFIX streaming?

While a -1 would generate more interesting emails, I also have a +1 on  
this approach -- extending the charter makes more sense and may  
simplify keeping the two formats aligned.

-- dan

On Nov 9, 2010, at 4:43 PM, Peter Musgrave wrote:

> All,
>
> As discussed in the consensus call to choose ASCII thread, there was  
> agreement that IPFIX was not motivated to log into files.
>
> Is there interest in this group extending it's charter to allow the  
> IPFIX streaming work to be specified here?
>
> I wanted to get a sense for this before embarking on specific  
> charter text changes.
>
> As I see it the IPFIX work is well known by this group and makes  
> reference to the data model specified here.
>
> I would see two work items:
> - specification of and IANA registration for elements to be logged  
> (all are in the current problem statement)
> - a doc which indicates how signalling flows can be linked with  
> existing data flows already reported with IPFIX mechanisms (this  
> might just be an addition to the existing doc)
>
> Speaking personally, I think it makes sense to continue the  
> discussion with this group and avoid the admin overhead of creating  
> another one via dispatch.
>
> We have a group of IPFIX contributors who have shown their continued  
> willingness to do the work necessary to make this happen (and in  
> fact the first work item has seen lots of work, and two  
> implementations are known to exist).
>
> Opinions?
>
> Regards,
>
> Peter Musgrave
> (as co-chair)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sip-clf mailing list
> sip-clf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf