Subject: [IPFIX] MIB Variable Export: mibFieldOption vs EFSF

From: Nevil Brownlee <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 15:31:00 +1200

Hi all:

The note below reminds me that we need to make some progress on
MIB Variable Export.  The minutes from Berlin (now on the IETF
Proceedings page) say:
  - mibFieldOption proposed as alternative to Extended Field
      Specifiers (EFSF)
  - Brian Trammell: this is backwards compatible with current IPFIX
  - Juergen Quittek: but it adds an extra level of lookup in collectors
  - Benoit Claise: would like to compare EFSF vs option templates
  = This needs more discussion on the list

So far I haven't seen any discussion on this list.  My own view is that:
  i) the mibFieldOption follows what we've done for things like
     structured data.  We know it will work.
ii) EFSF seems a nice, general, mechanism but it's definitely an IPFIX
     extension, i.e. a new way of doing things.  If we're to use EFSF,
     we'll need to develop it as a new WG item and publish it before
     we can use it for MIB Variables.

We _need_ some more discussion.  Also it would be good to have a
draft proposing EFSF.  Paul, could you do that sometime soon, please?

Meantime, let's see some real discussion of mibOption and EFSF!

Cheers, Nevil

On 26/08/13 11:42 PM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
> The following draft will expire soon:
>
> Name:     draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export
> Title:    Exporting MIB Variables using the IPFIX Protocol
> State:    I-D Exists
> Expires:  2013-08-29 (in 2 days, 19 hours)

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