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

Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> Wed, 10 November 2010 14:45 UTC

Return-Path: <eburger@standardstrack.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 EDBFB3A689E for <sip-clf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 06:45:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.288, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 H0rw6BapTvWK for <sip-clf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 06:45:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gs19.inmotionhosting.com (gs19.inmotionhosting.com [205.134.252.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 010FA3A6851 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 06:45:29 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=standardstrack.com; h=Received:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer; b=1DZwLsvAOCbUcHwj9DeJ7l1srU3GVrSPFjozIhUH8BmU8Ir1F38vApCvaj01nJL4BmyS6b9cizha1eI3qrv2YIFrAvafZpo+CzHj/wFY8Rkn67yrgDsorWsBAjmVdkkk;
Received: from dhcp-4292.meeting.ietf.org ([130.129.66.146]) by gs19.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eburger@standardstrack.com>) id 1PGBuJ-00012s-7m; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 06:44:16 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-216--291979980"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CD9E06F.1020603@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:45:48 +0800
Message-Id: <E3080114-8CFA-4C3E-9CFE-F1F9DBD908C6@standardstrack.com>
References: <A9D693D6-3B7E-40D9-BC3F-BC0CED6A3C42@magorcorp.com> <4CD9E06F.1020603@cisco.com>
To: Peter Musgrave <peter.musgrave@magorcorp.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gs19.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - standardstrack.com
Cc: List SIP-CLF Mailing <sip-clf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sip-clf] Extend Charter to Include IPFIX streaming?
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: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 14:45:30 -0000

So long as the milestone is later than getting the real work done.

On Nov 10, 2010, at 7:59 AM, Benoit Claise wrote:

> Hi Peter,
> 
> It seems like a good idea/compromise to me.
> 
> I remember Daryl's draft about performance metrics that went all over the place because every WG said: "not in my yard!"
> He started in which date? Answered at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-malas-performance-metrics-00 to finally end up in PMOL, and it's just almost over.
> 
> It seems so easy for me to simply to update the SIPCLF charter, to add the item, to get it done with the same people/interest and at the same time as the ASCII file... and to move on.
> 
> Regards, Benoit.
>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sip-clf mailing list
> sip-clf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf