Subject: [ipfix] IPFIX protocol & info model issue

From: Juergen Quittek <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 22:54:52 +0100

Dear all,

there is one more issue left for the IPFIX protocol and info model that could
not sufficiently be discussed at our meeting:

The Info model contains an Information Element called 'sourceId' that has
the same semantics as the IPFIX Message header field 'source ID'.  The header
field is mandatory.  So, why should we support and Information Element in
the data records or option data records?

We should either

  1. remove the 'source ID' from the IPFIX Message header
  2. remove the Information Element 'sourceId'
  3. keep both and explain in detail how to deal with cases
     where both are present and contain different values.

I prefer 2.

Who has a different preference?

Thanks,

    Juergen

--
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: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:01:55 +0100

>     where both are present and contain different values.

So do I.

Regards, Benoit.

---

From: Nevil Brownlee <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 03:46:06 +1200

> >     where both are present and contain different values.

Fine with me.   Cheers, Nevil

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   Nevil Brownlee                 Computer Science Department | ITSS
   Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941           The University of Auckland
   FAX: +64 9 373 7021      Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through University of Auckland
http://www.auckland.ac.nz/