Thanks for taking my suggestion. This revision looks good for me. Cheers, Tianran
________________________________ Sent from WeLink 发件人： Benoit Claise<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 收件人： Tianran Zhou<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;Benoit Claise<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;Jean Quilbeuf<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;opsawg<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 主题： Re: [OPSAWG] Specifying protocols in draft-claise-opsawg-collected-data-manifest 时间： 2022-03-19 22:47:16 Hi Tianran, Thanks for your feedback. I have added the required extra justification in the temp version: The goal behind this specification is not to expose new information via YANG objects but rather to define what needs to be kept as metadata (the data manifest) to ensure that the collected data can still be interpreted correctly, even if the source device is not accesible (from the collection system), or if the device has been updated (new operating system or new configuration). https://github.com/JeanQuilbeufHuawei/draft-collected-data-manifest Regards, Benoit On 2/10/2022 2:46 AM, Tianran Zhou wrote: Thanks Jean and Benoit for your clarification. I think this manifest information is useful. One more justification IMO might be useful. When controller and collector are on separate servers, which is a very common deployment, collector may not have access to the device configuration. T. From: OPSAWG [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Benoit Claise Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 10:42 PM To: Tianran Zhou <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>; Jean Quilbeuf <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>; opsawg <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Specifying protocols in draft-claise-opsawg-collected-data-manifest Hi Tianran, On 2/9/2022 2:04 PM, Tianran Zhou wrote: Hi Jean, I am a little confused about this manifest? Can we just read from the device about the configuration? We can get all the running information. I'm not sure whether this is a generic question or whether your question relates to the message below. Let me answer the generic question. We don't always want to read the devices information from the closed-loop automation systems or the database. Once known ... "This data manifest instance file MUST be streamed all with the data and stored along with the collected data. In case the data are moved to different place (typically a database), the data manifest MUST follow the collected data. This can render the data unusable if that context is lost, for instance when the data is stored without the relevent information." Also the context might be lost, so not available any longer from the device Ex: how was it metered? This is what we were trying to say with this generic sentence in the charter: "This can render the data unusable if that context is lost, for instance when the data is stored without the relevent information." There is some more justifications in the introduction (section 2). Regards, Benoit Best, Tianran ________________________________ Sent from WeLink 发件人： Jean Quilbeuf<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 收件人： opsawg<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 主题： [OPSAWG] Specifying protocols in draft-claise-opsawg-collected-data-manifest 时间： 2022-02-09 20:33:06 Dear All, We are wondering whether to add information about protocols in the data manifest draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-claise-opsawg-collected-data-manifest/ Details are here https://github.com/JeanQuilbeufHuawei/draft-collected-data-manifest/issues/9 (that git repo contains a pre-01 version of the draft). The data manifest should contain the information that a device able to stream telemetry can gather to allow a posteriori understanding of values stored in a time series database for instance. In that context, knowing the protocol would enable to understand whether some metrics can be missed (for instance if UDP push is used) and explain some gaps in the time serie. 1 - In the model, do we want to encode that fact as a Boolean (such as unreliable_subscription) that would be attached to a particular MDT subscription or do we want to specify the protocol used for subscription and let the consumer of the model draw the conclusion themselves? 2 - Another point is about the encoding used, do we need to specify it in the data-manifest or do we leave this as a responsibility of the collector/database system? For the second question, not that he collector/database system still has the responsibility to modify the data manifest if that encoding is changed. Any suggestions? Best, Jean _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
