Subject: [ipfix] Selection Criteria

From: "Norseth, KC" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 10:21:49 -0500

Hello folks,

As we discussed the selection criteria for evaluating the protocols, I would
like more input.  If there is some more selection criteria that we need to
have that has not been addressed, mail it to the group.  One criteria that
needs to be added for example, is the Intellectual property rights. Simply
stated, if the protocol owner is not willing to stick to the IETF IPR, we
will not consider it.  Remember, if the protocol cannot comply by one of the
selection criteria, it is not down and out, it is a checkmark against it.
It is still possible this could be something that the protocol can be
tweaked to make it conform or if it is something that just cannot be met.  

My goal is to have the next draft ready for submission at the end of next
week.  This week or early next week is when I want the input.  Changes that
came from the conference will be included in this release.

K.C.

---

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 21:07:55 +0100

Hi,

2 more selection criterias should be:
- extensible in terms of information model
- flexible, i.e. export of self describing structure (the keyword template being
banned)

Regards, Benoit

"Norseth, KC" wrote:

> stated, if the protocol owner is not willing to stick to the IETF IPR, we will
> not consider it.  Remember, if the protocol cannot comply by one of the
> selection criteria, it is not down and out, it is a checkmark against it.  It
> is still possible this could be something that the protocol can be tweaked to
> make it conform or if it is something that just cannot be met.
>

--
Help        mailto:[email-masked] and say "help" in message body
Unsubscribe mailto:[email-masked] and say
"unsubscribe ipfix" in message body
Archive     http://ipfix.doit.wisc.edu/archive/

---

From: "K.C. Norseth" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:39:34 -0700

Got it.  We will want to be more precise on those 2 items.  If I miss on the
wording, you can correct it.
I am not sure what you mean the keyword template being banned, you mean ban
it or what?  This was discussed and we need to be careful on how we use the
word.  It can mean we pass the record definition.  Template can still be
used and not pass the structure layout.

Ganesh and I were going to talk on Tuesday to work on the next rev,
including all the things discussed in the meeting.  By Friday, I want to
have encorporated everything from the conference, as well as these things.
Friday, we will have something for the group to see.

K.C.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Benoit Claise" <[email-masked]>
To: "Norseth, KC" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [ipfix] Selection Criteria

| Hi,
|
| 2 more selection criterias should be:
| - extensible in terms of information model
| - flexible, i.e. export of self describing structure (the keyword template
being
| banned)
|
| Regards, Benoit
|
| "Norseth, KC" wrote:
|
| >
| >
| > Hello folks,
| >
| > As we discussed the selection criteria for evaluating the protocols, I
would
| > like more input.  If there is some more selection criteria that we need
to
| > have that has not been addressed, mail it to the group.  One criteria
that
| > needs to be added for example, is the Intellectual property rights.
Simply
| > stated, if the protocol owner is not willing to stick to the IETF IPR,
we will
| > not consider it.  Remember, if the protocol cannot comply by one of the
| > selection criteria, it is not down and out, it is a checkmark against
it.  It
| > is still possible this could be something that the protocol can be
tweaked to
| > make it conform or if it is something that just cannot be met.
| >
| > My goal is to have the next draft ready for submission at the end of
next
| > week.  This week or early next week is when I want the input.  Changes
that
| > came from the conference will be included in this release.
| >
| > K.C.
|
|
| --
| Help        mailto:[email-masked] and say "help" in message
body
| Unsubscribe mailto:[email-masked] and say
| "unsubscribe ipfix" in message body
| Archive     http://ipfix.doit.wisc.edu/archive/
|

---

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 02:29:35 +0100

"K.C. Norseth" wrote:

> word.

Well, when I used the "template" keyword during the WG meeting, I was told that
I could not say that
one of the selection criteria must be: based on template.
The given reason was: template is implementation specific, which I beg to
differ...
Because when I look at the template definition from the architecture draft, it
doesn't refer to any specific implementation.

Regards, Benoit

> It can mean we pass the record definition.  Template can still be