Subject: [dispatch] FW: I-DAction:draft-kaplan-dispatch-session-id-00.txt

From: "Dawes, Peter, VF-Group" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 15:59:44 +0100

Hello,
Gonzallo listed related work (Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:08:03 +0200) as
"1) We have Hadriel's draft, 2) We also have the following draft, which
eventually led to the disaggregated media work:
http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id/draft-loreto-sipping-dialog-correlati
on-01.txt 3) We also have the SIP-XMPP work, which may also need to
correlate sessions somehow."

I would like to add
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dawes-sipping-debug-02 to this
discussion of use cases for some form of correlation identifier. This
draft relates to debugging/troubleshooting to meet documented
requirements from 3GPP and OMA, and proposes a kind of correlation
identifier in a new header.

Regards,
Peter

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:05:57 -0500
From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] FW:
	I-DAction:draft-kaplan-dispatch-session-id-00.txt
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked],
	[email-masked],	[email-masked],
	[email-masked]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

[email-masked] wrote:
> Paul,
> 
> Thank you for the examples. The scenarios can be really complex. I
hope we can get these correlation identifiers, whatever their names, to
work correctly in all cases.... 
> 
> I am not sure I understood your message correctly. Do you say we
should have two different identifiers because we use them for two
different things? 

I think there may be more than two distinct usages that will require 
different ones.

IMO use cases should be gathered and then bucketed into sets that can be

satisfied by a single mechanism, without assuming initially how many 
buckets there will be.

(But I'm still on record as not being convinced that a correlation id is

needed *at all* for the case when multiple sip UAs are participating on 
behalf of a single user in a call.)

> Thanks a lot
> Laura

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:11:18 -0600

This is all excellent, of course.

My question is, what will it take for us to move forward on some flavor of a 
Session-ID (or other header field) that SIPCLF (for example) can use to 
correlate log entries collected from various SIP entities?

Bar BOF in Anaheim? Or can we propose something more concrete in the next 
small number of weeks?

Thanks,

Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dawes, Peter, VF-Group" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; 
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; 
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 8:59 AM
Subject: [dispatch] FW: I-DAction:draft-kaplan-dispatch-session-id-00.txt

> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 17:21:39 +0100

Hi Peter,

My understanding is that session-id and debug-id cover different sets of requirements. 

Session-id is in every message. If people want to find out what happened two days before, they can look at the old logs and the session-id is there in every message to help them to correlate e2e. For the debug-id to be there you have to know in advance that and which e2e traffic you would like to have correlated. The debug-id is activated "on-demand" and has no performance impact when it is not active, session-id is active all the time. The advantage of the debug-id is that there is no performance impact when debugging is not needed. Is my understanding correct? 
 
I like the debug-id stuff, it's  really smart and we looked at it. But our troubleshooting and security guys want the session-id, for the reason above. I assume every service provider has its own needs and requirements.           

Spencer is right.  BOF, CLF whatever...we have to find some way to come forward with the e2e correlation. 

Thanks a lot
Laura

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dawes, Peter, VF-Group [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 4:00 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: Liess, Laura; [email-masked]; 
> [email-masked]; Hülsemann, Martin; Pinker, Gerold
> Subject: FW: I-DAction:draft-kaplan-dispatch-session-id-00.txt
> 
> Hello,