Re: [sip-clf] draft-ietf-sipclf-format-00 comments

Gonzalo Salgueiro <gsalguei@cisco.com> Fri, 11 March 2011 23:06 UTC

Return-Path: <gsalguei@cisco.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 9E8A23A6A91 for <sip-clf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:06:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 oLbJYTvdho-3 for <sip-clf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:06:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from av-tac-sj.cisco.com (firebird.cisco.com [171.68.227.73]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936363A6A58 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:06:36 -0800 (PST)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from rooster.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-sj.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2BN7rWJ003418; Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:07:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-64-102-154-216.cisco.com (dhcp-64-102-154-216.cisco.com [64.102.154.216]) by rooster.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2BN7kPI017891; Fri, 11 Mar 2011 18:07:46 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-76--544881130
From: Gonzalo Salgueiro <gsalguei@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=c842r67B=BZU0Ep-_+mijeTvBw55M3qTEVvf1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 18:07:45 -0500
Message-Id: <7321A81E-1E05-4EBF-8250-1AF9DD09CEA4@cisco.com>
References: <AANLkTimXr_8sHoUCOBkJtLR073=Z-m2A=jqbs4FXyNs+@mail.gmail.com> <B116D9C8-C234-44C7-B2D4-3F2C9860A8BD@cisco.com> <AANLkTi=c842r67B=BZU0Ep-_+mijeTvBw55M3qTEVvf1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anders Nygren <anders.nygren@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
Cc: sip-clf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sip-clf] draft-ietf-sipclf-format-00 comments
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, 11 Mar 2011 23:06:37 -0000

Thanks Anders. This reflected an earlier intent for microsecond accuracy that has since been rescinded. I have amended the text.

Regards,

Gonzalo

On Mar 11, 2011, at 5:43 PM, Anders Nygren wrote:

> One more thing,
> page 9,
> The text says that fractional seconds is 6 bytes but figure 4 shows 3 bytes.
> 
> /Anders
> 
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Gonzalo Salgueiro <gsalguei@cisco.com> wrote:
>> Anders -
>> 
>> Thanks for providing your feedback, it is much appreciated as we work through developing this format.
>> 
>> I'm very glad to hear you are implementing this already and would be willing to follow up with you offline to get some data points on how you decided to do this, how difficult it was, and how useful you found it, what you would change, etc.
>> 
>> Comments inline...
>> On Mar 11, 2011, at 1:01 PM, Anders Nygren wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi
>>> I am not sure what is the correct way for commenting on the SIP-CLF spec,
>>> so I will do it here until someone tells me that there is a better
>>> place to do it.
>>> 
>> [GS] This is indeed the place.
>> 
>>> I am trying to implement a log reader and writer according to
>>> draft-ietf-sipclf-format-00 and have found a few small errors.
>>> 
>>> page 8:
>>>   "Record Length (6 bytes):  Hexadecimal encoded total length of this
>>>    log record, including "Flags" and "Record Length" fields, and
>>>    terminating line-feed."
>>> 
>>> Should that include the version field as well?
>> 
>> [GS] Yes this does include the Version field. It is the length of the ENTIRE record including all of <IndexPointers>, <MandatoryFields>, <OptionalFields>
>> The list of items in the text you have selected is not meant to be  complete listing of all fields, rather a representative list indicating that everything is included. If you think there is value in specifically mentioning the Version field, then I will modify the text as follows:
>> 
>> Hexadecimal encoded total length of this log record, including "Version", "Record Length", "Flags" fields, and terminating line-feed.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> page 12:
>>>   "Length Field (2 bytes):  Indicates the length of the value coded in
>>>    this TLV, hexadecimal encoded.  This length does NOT include the
>>>    TLV header."
>>> 
>>> The length field is shown as 4 bytes in figure 5.
>> 
>> Thanks. Great catch.  This is indeed wrong. The figure is correct. I will change the text to 4 bytes.
>> 
>> Warm Regards,
>> 
>> Gonzalo
>>> 
>>> /Anders Nygren
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sip-clf mailing list
>>> sip-clf@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf
>> 
>>