Subject: [IPFIX] Updated agenda for San Francisco meeting

From: Nevil Brownlee <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:45:08 +1300

Hi all:

If you have any further changes, please send them to me
pronto :-)

Cheers, Nevil

======================================================
Ip Flow Information Export WG (ipfix)
IETF #74, San Francisco
Monday, 23 Mar 09 at 1300-1500
======================================================

Chairs:
Juergen Quittek <[email-masked]>
Nevil Brownlee  <[email-masked]>

 >>> DRAFT <<<  AGENDA:

1. Agenda review WG Status                              = 5 min

2. Internet-Draft status                                = 5 min
      [In RFC Editor queue:
        - draft-ietf-ipfix-architecture-12.txt
        - draft-ietf-ipfix-as-12.txt
        - draft-ietf-ipfix-reducing-redundancy-04.txt
        - draft-ietf-ipfix-testing-04.txt
        - draft-ietf-psamp-framework-13.txt
        - draft-ietf-psamp-sample-tech-10.txt
        - draft-ietf-psamp-protocol-09.txt
        - draft-ietf-psamp-info-11.txt]

3. Information Element Registry status                 = 5 min
       IANA's XML page for this are now at
         http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml
       We are now handling errata found in RFC 5102, IANA should
       change the registry for such changes;  We need to establish
       a procedure for handling changes in other IEs

4. Drafts submitted to IESG                             = 15 min
    a) IPFIX File Format (Brian Trammell)                    ( 3 min)
       - draft-ietf-ipfix-file-03.txt  24 Oct 08
    b) Exporting Type Information for IPFIX IEs (Elisa Boschi)
       - draft-ietf-ipfix-exporting-type-02.txt  14 Jul 08   ( 3 min)

    c) IPFIX MIB (Thomas Dietz)
       - draft-dietz-ipfix-mib-05.txt  3 Nov 08
           MIB Doctors have requested a revised draft        ( 9 min)

5. Current WG drafts                                    = 50 min
    a) IPFIX Per-Stream SCTP reporting (Benoit CLaise)       ( 5 min)
       - draft-ietf-ipfix-export-per-sctp-stream-02.txt
           26 Jan 09
    b) Configuration Data Model                              ( 5 min)
       - draft-ietf-ipfix-configuration-model-01.txt
            3 Nov 08
    c) IPFIX Mediation: (Kobayashi Atsushi)                  (15 min)
       - draft-ietf-ipfix-mediators-problem-statement-02.txt
            4 Feb 09
       - draft-ietf-ipfix-mediators-framework-02.txt         (25 min)
           10 Feb 09

6. Other drafts                                         = 30 min
    a) Flow Selection (Lorenzo Peluso, Tanja Zseby)          (10 min)
        - draft-peluso-flowselection-tech-02

    b) IP Flow Anonymization Support (Elisa Bschi, Brian Trammel)
        - draft-boschi-ipfix-anon-02  12 Jan 09              (10 min)

    c) Handling Structured Data (Benoit Claise)
        - draft-claise-structured-data-in-ipfix-00.txt       (10 min)

7. Any Other Drafts ???                                 = 10 min

Presentation slides will be available at
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/meeting_materials.cgi?meeting_num=74
  (search for IPFIX in the Operations and Management Area)

Participation via jabber is offered at [email-masked]

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
  Nevil Brownlee                    Computer Science Department | ITS
  Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941             The University of Auckland
  FAX: +64 9 373 7453   Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand

---

From: Nevil Brownlee <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:53:11 +1300

Hi Paul:

I agree that we need to agree on a process for correcting mistakes
in the Information Element Registry.

For IEs in the registry that came from and RFC it's easy - we discuss
them on the IPFIX list, reach consensus on the change needed, post
them using the RFC Editor's Errata web page, then ask IANA to make
the change as documented in the errata (i.e. giving OLD vs NEW text).

For other ('new') IEs that don't come from and RFC, we need a similar
process.  I suggest
   i. Discuss/reach consensus on the list (as above)
  ii. Submit the proposed change to IANA as though it were a request
      for a new IE
iii. IANA can pass the proposed change to the Expert Panel as usual
  iV. Once approved by the Experts, IANA can make the change

We need to get IANA to agree to this, of course; so let's start
that discussion.  Anyone have any comments/suggestions for improvement
on this suggestion?

Meanwhile, perhaps Paul could start by posting a list of the RFC5101
errata to the IPFIX list, please?

Cheers, Nevil

Paul Aitken wrote:
> Nevil,
> 
>> If you have any further changes, please send them to me pronto :-)
> 
> What about the fields whose bit-ordering is reversed?
> 
> We keep overlooking that, yet it's not an insignificant and unimportant 
> issue.
> 
> It should be highlighted to the WG and addressed immediately, to ensure 
> that all existing and future exporter and collector are correct.
> 
> Indeed, making this correction may introduce a backwards-incompatibility 
> in some exporters and/or collectors.