Subject: [ipfix] IPFIX Protocol Specifications for Billing

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 16:35:19 +0200

Dear all,

FYI.
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bclaise-ipfix-reliability-00.txt

Regards, Benoit.

--
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: Carter Bullard <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 13:33:31 -0400

SCTP is proposed as the only reliable transport for IPFIX, and not one
statement as to why TCP is inappropriate.  I'm fascinated that TCP,
the only IETF STANDARD for connection oriented reliable data transport,
isn't even a consideration for IPFIX.  I'm sure that I'm living in  
the past, and
not up on the modern world of real telecommunications, out of touch,
brain-dead, challenged, deranged whatever, but it just seems, .....,   
wrong.

Somewhere I heard, seems so long ago, that SCTP was ubiquitous, free,
highly available, etc...., but  I'm still wondering when my redhat  
enterprise
WS is going to get a SCTP stack.  I've got an ISO stack, but no SCTP  
stack.
That seems telling.  My Windows box doesn't have one, none of the SGI  
machines,
no formal support for SCTP from HP (except for SS7 platform ...), or  
IBM (anymore).
I'm still trying to connect to my Cisco, Juniper, Nortel, Marconi,  
Lucent, Laurel
routers with SCTP, but nada from any of them.  Oh and what about that
ethereal DOS attack that was caused by SCTP?

So why is SCTP on the list and no mention of TCP?  Even RFC 3257 states
"Many Internet applications therefore should find that either TCP or  
SCTP will
meet their transport requirements".  I'd really like to see some  
dialogue as to
why not TCP.  Surely IPFIX is not that special?

Carter