From: OPSAWG <[email protected]> on behalf of Joe Clarke (jclarke) 
<[email protected]>
Sent: 18 April 2020 22:13
To: opsawg
As was discussed in the April 7 virtual interim, we are doing a three-week call 
for opsawg adoption for this work.

<tp>
Tricky

It is the second largest I-D I have seen but is not the second hardest to read; 
it is sort of modular which makes it easier to follow.  Martin has done a 
sterling job in comparing it with the MIB and I suspect that that will be the 
only comprehensive review that it gets so should it become an RFC?  tricky.

I note that the IANA  Considerations does not match the YANG prefix statements 
and I do not like either of them.  ietf-ipfix is fine, but 
ieff-ipfix-packet-sampling fails the brevity test while ibde breaks the rules.  
perhaps ietf-ipfix-ps and ietf-ipfix-bde

If adopted, I would suggest keeping the name  as draft-ietf-ipfix...  much 
easier to track for me

6.3.1 seems a bit too 'tentative'

Tom Petch


This draft was an AD-sponsored work with Ignas and has now moved under Rob.  It 
has received a number of reviews (some thorough, some more cursory), and it is 
destined to obsolete 6728 (Configuration Data Model for the IP Flow Information 
Export (IPFIX) and Packet Sampling (PSAMP) Protocols) if ratified.  Because of 
that latter point, making this a WG item seems more appropriate than pushing it 
through as an AD-sponsored document.

To that end, does the WG feel this work is important and wants to take it up?  
In a nutshell, this document breaks up the original YANG module into three for 
the IPFIX collector and exporter functions, the PSAMP functions, and the 
templates for bulk data exports.  While it preserves the SCTP support, SCTP is 
no longer mandatory.  It also adds support for ietf-interfaces and hardware 
management (those did not exist at the time of 6728).

The reason for the three-week call is to give people enough time to read 
through and digest this document.  Please reply with support (or objections) as 
well as comments by May 10, 2020.

Thanks.

Joe
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Reply via email to