From Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de Mon Jul 6 05:20:11 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846733A6C1A for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 05:20:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kIdqJc7adzLf for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 05:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail33.telekom.de (tcmail33.telekom.de [194.25.30.7]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3CBE3A6909 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 05:20:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from s4de8psaanq.blf.telekom.de (HELO S4DE8PSAANQ.mitte.t-com.de) ([10.151.180.166]) by tcmail31.telekom.de with ESMTP; 06 Jul 2009 14:20:05 +0200 Received: from S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de ([10.151.229.12]) by S4DE8PSAANQ.mitte.t-com.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 6 Jul 2009 14:20:00 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 14:19:58 +0200 Message-ID: <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A50193E815@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> In-Reply-To: <49EED274.6040107@ripe.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Advancement of metrics to standards draft Thread-Index: AcnDItneH6rQ+GNHSuysnS45DbXG6g64NSsQ References: <49EED274.6040107@ripe.net> From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jul 2009 12:20:00.0138 (UTC) FILETIME=[150826A0:01C9FE34] Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: [ippm] Advancement of metrics to standards draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 12:20:11 -0000 Henk, Matt, the submitted draft on the advancement of metrics to standards hopefully = is clear enough on the suggested methodology and its execution. I won't participate in the Stockholm meeting. If the WG welcomes = continuation of the work on this document, then the areas requiring more = input I'm aware of are: - statistical tests on time series producing verifyable results with the = desired confidence=20 (suggested default 95%). And a review by a statistician in general. - Measurement and networking expert to define what are sufficiently = "identical network=20 conditions", as that's a basic assumption for the suggested metric = test. As a detailed comment, a reference and code for the Anderson Darling k = test is required. I hope, the draft may be found here: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-00.txt Regards, Ruediger=20 =20 Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion GmbH=20 Zentrum Technik Einf=FChrung=20 Technik Internet Backbone, TE142-19 R=FCdiger Geib Heinrich Hertz Str. 3-7 64297 Darmstadt Tel.: 06151/6282747 Fax: 0251/7985109 Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion (DT NP) GmbH Aufsichtsrat: Timotheus H=F6ttges (Vorsitzender) Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrung: Dr. Bruno Jacobfeuerborn (Vorsitzender), Albert = Matheis, Klaus Peren Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 14190 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn USt-IdNr.: DE 814645262 =20 =20 From henk@ripe.net Mon Jul 6 05:47:37 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8BC228C133 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 05:47:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.153 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.153 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.554, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id APvcZjjDYWU0 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 05:47:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postlady.ripe.net (postlady.ripe.net [193.0.19.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E66628C129 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 05:47:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postlady.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MNnbM-00017z-C5; Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:47:26 +0200 Received: from guest-26.ripe.net (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54DC02F583; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 14:47:20 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A51F258.6020608@ripe.net> Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:47:20 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de References: <49EED274.6040107@ripe.net> <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A50193E815@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> In-Reply-To: <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A50193E815@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d54148b88f5893b2ea1e03628c8b84ddcb Cc: matt@internet2.edu, ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Advancement of metrics to standards draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 12:47:37 -0000 Ruediger et al, Thanks for all the work so-far, we'll discuss the document in Stockholm and let you know about next steps. Henk > the submitted draft on the advancement of metrics to standards hopefull= y is clear enough on the suggested methodology and its execution. >=20 > I won't participate in the Stockholm meeting. If the WG welcomes contin= uation of the work on this document, then the areas requiring more input = I'm aware of are: > - statistical tests on time series producing verifyable results with th= e desired confidence=20 > (suggested default 95%). And a review by a statistician in general. > - Measurement and networking expert to define what are sufficiently "id= entical network=20 > conditions", as that's a basic assumption for the suggested metric te= st. >=20 > As a detailed comment, a reference and code for the Anderson Darling k = test is required. >=20 > I hope, the draft may be found here: >=20 > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-00.txt >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Ruediger=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion GmbH=20 > Zentrum Technik Einf=FChrung=20 > Technik Internet Backbone, TE142-19 > R=FCdiger Geib > Heinrich Hertz Str. 3-7 > 64297 Darmstadt > Tel.: 06151/6282747 > Fax: 0251/7985109 >=20 >=20 > Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion (DT NP) GmbH > Aufsichtsrat: Timotheus H=F6ttges (Vorsitzender) > Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrung: Dr. Bruno Jacobfeuerborn (Vorsitzender), Albert M= atheis, Klaus Peren > Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 14190 > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn > USt-IdNr.: DE 814645262 > =20 > =20 >=20 >=20 --=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.= net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From acmorton@att.com Mon Jul 6 12:10:47 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 103DE28C335 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 12:10:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.782 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.782 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.381, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oNQK4MpQa2Dn for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 12:10:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail161.messagelabs.com (mail161.messagelabs.com [216.82.253.115]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B9E28C41E for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 12:09:53 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: acmorton@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-4.tower-161.messagelabs.com!1246907360!13609888!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.0.0; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.54] Received: (qmail 4005 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2009 19:09:21 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpi135.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.54) by server-4.tower-161.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 6 Jul 2009 19:09:21 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpi135.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n66J9K3R023259 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 15:09:20 -0400 Received: from alph001.aldc.att.com (alph001.aldc.att.com [135.53.7.26]) by mlpi135.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n66J9GVe023191 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 15:09:16 -0400 Received: from aldc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alph001.aldc.att.com (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id n66J9FZu014527 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 15:09:16 -0400 Received: from maillennium.att.com (mailgw1.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by alph001.aldc.att.com (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id n66J9CWc014498 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 15:09:12 -0400 Message-Id: <200907061909.n66J9CWc014498@alph001.aldc.att.com> Received: from acmt.att.com (martym.mt.att.com[135.16.251.71](misconfigured sender)) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with SMTP id <20090706190911gw1003ibvte>; Mon, 6 Jul 2009 19:09:11 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [135.16.251.71] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 15:09:01 -0400 To: Henk Uijterwaal , Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de From: Al Morton In-Reply-To: <4A51F258.6020608@ripe.net> References: <49EED274.6040107@ripe.net> <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A50193E815@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> <4A51F258.6020608@ripe.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: matt@internet2.edu, ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Advancement of metrics to standards draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:10:47 -0000 Ruediger and all, Rather that write a long e-mail on this topic (that few people will read), I wrote a short memo (that few people will read). This memo is intended as a background for discussion of some of the issues Ruediger touched-on, and several new issues that occurred to me. It is intended to help advance (not replace) either the geib or bradner versions of the metrictest memos. Whenever the advancing metrics topic comes up, I've made a taken a position at the microphone that may not have been fully understood. So, I've given-up some of my holiday weekend and included details of my rant in this short memo. I hope it will be useful to IPPM as we seek a way *up* the standards track that works. Al A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts= directories. Title : Problems and Possible=20 Solutions for Advancing Metrics on the Standards Track Author(s) : A. Morton Filename : draft-morton-ippm-advance-metrics-00.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2009-07-06 This memo identifies some issues with the process of progressing performance metric RFCs along the standards track. This memo takes the position that the metric definitions themselves should be the primary focus, rather than the implementations of metrics. This appears to allow some simplification of the task at hand and subsequently leads to solutions for the issues raised. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-morton-ippm-advance-metrics-00.txt At 08:47 AM 7/6/2009, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: >Ruediger et al, > >Thanks for all the work so-far, we'll discuss the >document in Stockholm and let you know about next steps. > >Henk > > >>the submitted draft on the advancement of=20 >>metrics to standards hopefully is clear enough=20 >>on the suggested methodology and its execution. >>I won't participate in the Stockholm meeting.=20 >>If the WG welcomes continuation of the work on=20 >>this document, then the areas requiring more input I'm aware of are: >>- statistical tests on time series producing=20 >>verifyable results with the desired=20 >>confidence (suggested default 95%). And a=20 >>review by a statistician in general. >>- Measurement and networking expert to define=20 >>what are sufficiently "identical=20 >>network conditions", as that's a basic=20 >>assumption for the suggested metric test. >>As a detailed comment, a reference and code for=20 >>the Anderson Darling k test is required. >>I hope, the draft may be found here: >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-00.txt >>Regards, >>Ruediger >> >> >> >>Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion GmbH Zentrum=20 >>Technik Einf=FChrung Technik Internet Backbone, TE142-19 >>R=FCdiger Geib >>Heinrich Hertz Str. 3-7 >>64297 Darmstadt >>Tel.: 06151/6282747 >>Fax: 0251/7985109 >> >>Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion (DT NP) GmbH >>Aufsichtsrat: Timotheus H=F6ttges (Vorsitzender) >>Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrung: Dr. Bruno Jacobfeuerborn=20 >>(Vorsitzender), Albert Matheis, Klaus Peren >>Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 14190 >>Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn >>USt-IdNr.: DE 814645262 >> >> > > >-- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- >Henk Uijterwaal Email:= henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net >RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku >P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 >1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 >The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 >---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > >Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no > hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. >_______________________________________________ >ippm mailing list >ippm@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de Tue Jul 7 00:37:42 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7CA228C2ED for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 00:37:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id STlScSYJeapm for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 00:37:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail73.telekom.de (tcmail73.telekom.de [217.243.239.135]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A87328C2AF for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 00:37:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from s4de8psaans.blf.telekom.de (HELO s4de8psaans.mitte.t-com.de) ([10.151.180.168]) by tcmail71.telekom.de with ESMTP; 07 Jul 2009 09:30:40 +0200 Received: from S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de ([10.151.229.12]) by s4de8psaans.mitte.t-com.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 7 Jul 2009 09:30:40 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 09:30:38 +0200 Message-ID: <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A50193ED15@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> In-Reply-To: <200907061909.n66J9CLi014495@alph001.aldc.att.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [ippm] Advancement of metrics to standards draft Thread-Index: Acn+bU0xx4rIY7C0QTm/ekqj2kaX9gAY01Aw References: <49EED274.6040107@ripe.net> <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A50193E815@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> <4A51F258.6020608@ripe.net> <200907061909.n66J9CLi014495@alph001.aldc.att.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jul 2009 07:30:40.0622 (UTC) FILETIME=[D45DF8E0:01C9FED4] Cc: henk@ripe.net, matt@internet2.edu, ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Advancement of metrics to standards draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:37:42 -0000 Al, thanks for your work. At least the two of us read each others=20 documents. I think it is good to work out general principles and=20 carefully go to details later on. Your draft contains a bit=20 of both. The really bad thing is, that as soon we go to a detailed=20 description, we face issues. That's why I would suggest=20 to start by the general approach. I however prefer a sufficiently defined statistical test,=20 if our purpose is to avoid "everything" to be IPPM=20 compliant. But may have overlooked other possibilities=20 to reach this aim. Regards, Ruediger -----Original Message----- From: Al Morton [mailto:acmorton@att.com]=20 Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 9:09 PM To: Henk Uijterwaal; Geib, R=FCdiger Cc: matt@internet2.edu; ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Advancement of metrics to standards draft Ruediger and all, Rather that write a long e-mail on this topic (that few people will read), I wrote a short memo (that few people will read). This memo is intended as a background for discussion of some of the issues Ruediger touched-on, and several new issues that occurred to me. It is intended to help advance (not replace) either the geib or bradner versions of the metrictest memos. Whenever the advancing metrics topic comes up, I've made a taken a position at the microphone that may not have been fully understood. So, I've given-up some of my holiday weekend and included details of my rant in this short memo. I hope it will be useful to IPPM as we seek a way *up* the standards track that works. Al A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts = directories. Title : Problems and Possible=20 Solutions for Advancing Metrics on the Standards Track Author(s) : A. Morton Filename : draft-morton-ippm-advance-metrics-00.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2009-07-06 This memo identifies some issues with the process of progressing performance metric RFCs along the standards track. This memo takes the position that the metric definitions themselves should be the primary focus, rather than the implementations of metrics. This appears to allow some simplification of the task at hand and subsequently leads to solutions for the issues raised. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-morton-ippm-advance-metrics-00.= txt At 08:47 AM 7/6/2009, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: >Ruediger et al, > >Thanks for all the work so-far, we'll discuss the >document in Stockholm and let you know about next steps. > >Henk > > >>the submitted draft on the advancement of=20 >>metrics to standards hopefully is clear enough=20 >>on the suggested methodology and its execution. >>I won't participate in the Stockholm meeting.=20 >>If the WG welcomes continuation of the work on=20 >>this document, then the areas requiring more input I'm aware of are: >>- statistical tests on time series producing=20 >>verifyable results with the desired=20 >>confidence (suggested default 95%). And a=20 >>review by a statistician in general. >>- Measurement and networking expert to define=20 >>what are sufficiently "identical=20 >>network conditions", as that's a basic=20 >>assumption for the suggested metric test. >>As a detailed comment, a reference and code for=20 >>the Anderson Darling k test is required. >>I hope, the draft may be found here: >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-00.txt >>Regards, >>Ruediger >> >> >> >>Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion GmbH Zentrum=20 >>Technik Einf=FChrung Technik Internet Backbone, TE142-19 >>R=FCdiger Geib >>Heinrich Hertz Str. 3-7 >>64297 Darmstadt >>Tel.: 06151/6282747 >>Fax: 0251/7985109 >> >>Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion (DT NP) GmbH >>Aufsichtsrat: Timotheus H=F6ttges (Vorsitzender) >>Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrung: Dr. Bruno Jacobfeuerborn=20 >>(Vorsitzender), Albert Matheis, Klaus Peren >>Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 14190 >>Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn >>USt-IdNr.: DE 814645262 >> >> > > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------ >Henk Uijterwaal Email: = henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net >RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku >P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 >1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 >The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 >------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------ > >Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no > hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. >_______________________________________________ >ippm mailing list >ippm@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de Wed Jul 8 02:37:47 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EE003A69EB for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 02:37:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.814 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.814 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.435, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 04XeFNxAtUhX for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 02:37:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail73.telekom.de (tcmail73.telekom.de [217.243.239.135]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 116C33A682B for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 02:37:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from s4de8psaanq.blf.telekom.de (HELO S4DE8PSAANQ.mitte.t-com.de) ([10.151.180.166]) by tcmail71.telekom.de with ESMTP; 08 Jul 2009 11:37:44 +0200 Received: from S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de ([10.151.229.12]) by S4DE8PSAANQ.mitte.t-com.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 8 Jul 2009 11:37:43 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 11:37:44 +0200 Message-ID: <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A501985138@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: RE: [ippm] Meeting in Stockholm Thread-Index: Acn/r73lcFyH2GZPQ/SMMNJKUFOxLg== From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jul 2009 09:37:43.0651 (UTC) FILETIME=[BE75A330:01C9FFAF] Cc: Gerhard.Hasslinger@t-systems.com, ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Meeting in Stockholm X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 09:37:47 -0000 Dear chairs, please assign a time slot to present and discuss the advancement of = metrics. My colleague Gerhard Hasslinger will present the design team draft, =20 draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-00. Please let me know how much time's available to present the draft. I = plan to=20 draft the presentation by the end of next week. My impression is, that ther may be reluctancy to work with statistical=20 tests. I try to work out one example metric test with data collected by = a=20 single implementation measuring along a partially shared path (one = origin, two destinations).=20 Henk and Matt, if you have kept raw data from the TTM/Surveyor metric = test=20 and could make it available to Gerhard and me (this could however also = be=20 done after the Stockholm meeting, if there's interest). Regards, Ruediger Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion GmbH=20 Zentrum Technik Einf=FChrung=20 Technik Internet Backbone, TE142-19 R=FCdiger Geib Heinrich Hertz Str. 3-7 64297 Darmstadt Tel.: 06151/6282747 Fax: 0251/7985109 Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion (DT NP) GmbH Aufsichtsrat: Timotheus H=F6ttges (Vorsitzender) Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrung: Dr. Bruno Jacobfeuerborn (Vorsitzender), Albert = Matheis, Klaus Peren Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 14190 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn USt-IdNr.: DE 814645262 ---------------------------- IPPM group, We will meet in Stockholm, please let us know if you have any agenda items. As a reminder, here is a list of things people promised to do in March: 1. Submit first draft of the advancement of metrics draft. (Ruediger et = al). 2. Ask the list if there is interest in the various TWAMP drafts. (Al) 3. Include Yakov's comments in the Composition Framework draft and = prepare for WGLC. (Al) 4. Finish the WG Reporting draft and prepare for WGLC. = (Stas/Martin/Matt) 5. IPR disclosure for Loss Metrics, comments from group if we should = pick this up. (Joel, Nick). Matt & Henk -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Henk Uijterwaal Email: = henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- From henk@ripe.net Wed Jul 8 03:14:28 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D69F13A6F2B for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 03:14:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.853 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.853 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.876, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nUB7cRF11OMr for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 03:14:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ripe.net [193.0.19.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0EE83A6F2D for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 03:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MOUAA-00086b-At; Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:14:11 +0200 Received: from geir-3.local (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B6022F595; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 12:14:06 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A54716E.5060405@ripe.net> Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:14:06 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de References: <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A501985138@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> In-Reply-To: <151C164FE2E066418D8D44D0801543A501985138@S4DE8PSAAQA.mitte.t-com.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d58db24699c1d4b61071aacdaaedd04d53 Cc: Gerhard.Hasslinger@t-systems.com, matt@internet2.edu, ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Meeting in Stockholm X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 10:14:28 -0000 Hi Ruediger, > Please let me know how much time's available to present the draft. I plan to > draft the presentation by the end of next week. We have a long slot and very few requests, so I'd say something like 10-15 minutes for the presentation, 15-20 minutes for discussion. Henk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From henk@ripe.net Mon Jul 13 01:10:34 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9E843A6D1C for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 01:10:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.085 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.085 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.100, BAYES_40=-0.185, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sQ+9UpeDl+-g for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 01:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ripe.net [193.0.19.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C5973A6BF2 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 01:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MQGci-0003E6-6L for ippm@ietf.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 10:11:01 +0200 Received: from geir-3.local (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A6A42F583 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 10:10:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A5AEC10.4030706@ripe.net> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 10:10:56 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IETF IPPM WG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d570463579c22fb57606d467caf12b5c24 Subject: [ippm] 1st draft Agenda for IETF75 X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 08:10:34 -0000 IPPM Group, Below is the first draft of the agenda for Stockholm. Comments are welcome. Matt & Henk - - - IPPM WG ======= 1. Administrativia 2. Status of Drafts and Milestones 3. Reporting draft (Stas/Martin/Matt) draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-03.txt 4. Composition Drafts (Al Morton) draft-ietf-ippm-framework-compagg-08.txt draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-09.txt 5. TWAMP features (Al Morton et al) draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-reflect-octets-01.txt draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-session-cntrl-01.txt 6. Advancing Metrics along the standards track (??) draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-00 draft-morton-ippm-advance-metrics-00 7. Burst Loss Draft/Nick Duffield et al. draft-duffield-ippm-burst-loss-metrics-01.txt 8. AOB. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From root@core3.amsl.com Mon Jul 13 12:00:01 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@ietf.org Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 76C4D3A6A0E; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:00:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20090713190001.76C4D3A6A0E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:00:01 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: [ippm] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-04.txt X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:00:01 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IP Performance Metrics Working Group of the IETF. Title : Reporting IP Performance Metrics to Users Author(s) : S. Shalunov, M. Swany Filename : draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-04.txt Pages : 45 Date : 2009-07-13 The aim of this document is to define a small set of metrics that are robust, easy to understand, orthogonal, relevant, and easy to compute. The IPPM WG has defined a large number of richly parameterized metrics because network measurement has many purposes. Often, the ultimate purpose is to report a concise set of metrics describing a network's state to an end user. It is for this purpose that the present set of metrics is defined. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2009-07-13115317.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From root@core3.amsl.com Mon Jul 13 16:00:01 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@ietf.org Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 3F8513A6D5B; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:00:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20090713230001.3F8513A6D5B@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:00:01 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: [ippm] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-reflect-octets-02.txt X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:00:01 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IP Performance Metrics Working Group of the IETF. Title : TWAMP Reflect Octets Feature Author(s) : A. Morton, L. Ciavattone Filename : draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-reflect-octets-02.txt Pages : 19 Date : 2009-07-13 The IETF has completed its work on the core specification of TWAMP - the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol. This memo describes a new feature for TWAMP: an optional capability where the responder host returns some of the command octets or padding octets to the controller, and/or ensures that the same test packet sizes are used in both directions. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-reflect-octets-02.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-reflect-octets-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2009-07-13154808.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From henk@ripe.net Tue Jul 14 00:14:17 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5B43A69E3 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:14:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.316 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.316 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.283, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f3PN8ydtCfMF for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ripe.net [193.0.19.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDB663A6DD8 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MQcCw-0005K0-SQ for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:13:52 +0200 Received: from geir-3.local (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6E742F583; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:13:46 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A5C302A.70500@ripe.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:13:46 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Henk Uijterwaal References: <4A447D59.5030708@ripe.net> In-Reply-To: <4A447D59.5030708@ripe.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d544a3e98e1cec89cf09ccb221c34dcdb1 Cc: IETF IPPM WG Subject: Re: [ippm] WGLC for draft-ietf-ippm-framework-compagg-08.txt X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:14:17 -0000 IPPM group, > This is a WGLC for the draft: > > Framework for Metric Composition > draft-ietf-ippm-framework-compagg-08.txt > > The draft has been discussed extensively in this group, comments from the > last reviews have been included and the draft appears to be stable by now. > We like to start a WGLC in order to move it forward. Please raise any > remaining issues by Tuesday, July 14, 8:00 UTC. > > An URL for the draft is: > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-framework-compagg-08.txt No issues were raised, so we move this draft to the IESG. Matt & Henk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From henk@ripe.net Tue Jul 14 00:34:27 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C35C3A68C9 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:34:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.364 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.364 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.235, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YCS0mYoyhuqr for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:34:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ripe.net [193.0.19.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DDFE3A694D for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:33:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MQcU8-0006Hn-Sy; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:31:38 +0200 Received: from geir-3.local (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB2602F583; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:31:32 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A5C3454.4040705@ripe.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:31:32 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Al Morton References: <200906161241.n5GCf9Xc016768@mlth002.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com> <4A379465.5080001@ripe.net> In-Reply-To: <4A379465.5080001@ripe.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d5ccf3b3a6e90a139f7af8af3361534551 Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Question on Reflect Octets Draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:34:27 -0000 Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > IPPM group, > >> Let us know whet you think, >> Al and Len > > As with the other question from Al, please give your opinion in the next > 3 weeks. Same here, no comments, so we assume that there is agreement. Henk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From henk@ripe.net Tue Jul 14 00:37:24 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6E43A6D28 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:37:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.411 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.411 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.812, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PuAwo7eFLi4K for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:37:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postlady.ripe.net (postlady.ripe.net [193.0.19.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE6E53A6A66 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:37:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postlady.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MQcXM-0003DG-12 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:34:57 +0200 Received: from geir-3.local (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE4DF2F583 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:34:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A5C351B.3060805@ripe.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:34:51 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ippm@ietf.org References: <20090713190001.76C4D3A6A0E@core3.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20090713190001.76C4D3A6A0E@core3.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d5e2708cbaefd29a6a2abbe89dd6da40f8 Subject: Re: [ippm] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-04.txt X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:37:24 -0000 Authors, > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the IP Performance Metrics Working Group of the IETF. > > > Title : Reporting IP Performance Metrics to Users > Author(s) : S. Shalunov, M. Swany > Filename : draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-04.txt > Pages : 45 > Date : 2009-07-13 Can you please let the group know what changed and if there are any issues left that need to be discussed (on a quick read, I don't think so)? Henk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From henk@ripe.net Tue Jul 14 03:20:26 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12E4E3A6CA5 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 03:20:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.939 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.939 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.790, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BotMsVGHtVPM for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 03:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ripe.net [193.0.19.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 257783A6C35 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 03:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MQcT2-0006D3-Ks; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:30:29 +0200 Received: from geir-3.local (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8916F2F583; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:30:22 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A5C340E.3030802@ripe.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:30:22 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Al Morton References: <4A37678E.7040306@ripe.net> <200906160959.n5G9xGXc009952@mlth002.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com> <4A377E78.4050100@ripe.net> <200906161228.n5GCSAmT002803@mlth002.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com> <4A379286.9050309@ripe.net> In-Reply-To: <4A379286.9050309@ripe.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d5a373f225893a8fd0f32a50748e3c7907 Cc: IETF IPPM WG Subject: Re: [ippm] Question on Individual Session Control [was Re: Meeting in Stockholm] X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:20:26 -0000 IPPM group, >> Question for IPPM: >> >> o Authors propose to _disallow previous_ Start/Stop (2,3) commands >> when this feature is available and selected. >> o What does IPPM want to do? >> o Points to Consider: >> - Mixing the Start/Stop complicates ... (lots of things) >> - The old set has no Stop-Ack, so if none is received, ... ? > > If you have an opinion on this, then please post to the list before > July 6. There have been no responses to this one, which seems to suggest that there is agreement with this proposal. If not, please speak up _now_, we like to conclude this draft and start a WGLC shortly after Stockholm. Henk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From mchiba@cisco.com Thu Jul 16 16:31:20 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196C328C197 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:31:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eRjTBwcEfh4o for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:31:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E140428C0D8 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:31:18 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAE9VX0qrR7PE/2dsb2JhbAC4U4gjkQ8FAoQL X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.42,413,1243814400"; d="scan'208";a="215225196" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Jul 2009 23:31:05 +0000 Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n6GNV5Qg009233; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:31:05 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6GNV5nP015875; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 23:31:05 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-21b.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.143]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:31:05 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:31:04 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4A5C3454.4040705@ripe.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [ippm] Question on Reflect Octets Draft Thread-Index: AcoEVaMpocKBg/daSmqwVMdiyiOJdwCF8WSQ References: <200906161241.n5GCf9Xc016768@mlth002.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com><4A379465.5080001@ripe.net> <4A5C3454.4040705@ripe.net> From: "Murtaza Chiba (mchiba)" To: "Henk Uijterwaal" , "Al Morton" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jul 2009 23:31:05.0677 (UTC) FILETIME=[7D4B4FD0:01CA066D] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1376; t=1247787065; x=1248651065; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=mchiba@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Murtaza=20Chiba=20(mchiba)=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[ippm]=20Question=20on=20Reflect=20Octe ts=20Draft |Sender:=20; bh=9GJP2Y1pSKoCtFU1rwuK/5P4vjVUmpvNBBvfU1u3VR8=; b=E0TKCZBjLxtNZ3O+6vP5v1nkRL4yNA+cUVJYfUXtk1+/kNeTeOdc+RZC57 /+6hpxHxKIzo4GKxj/w/vzKR42HiMG+KeOcIquAcIOPn8PjN99zLNNwMqgAS uEjewWLewi; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=mchiba@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Question on Reflect Octets Draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 23:31:20 -0000 I believe this is an important draft to move forward. Thanks, -murtaza -----Original Message----- From: ippm-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Henk Uijterwaal Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:32 AM To: Al Morton Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Question on Reflect Octets Draft Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > IPPM group, >=20 >> Let us know whet you think, >> Al and Len >=20 > As with the other question from Al, please give your opinion in the next > 3 weeks. Same here, no comments, so we assume that there is agreement. Henk --=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From henk@ripe.net Sun Jul 26 02:05:02 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA0283A68D7 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 02:05:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.808 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.808 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.209, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dfqxF9tf6NJ3 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 02:05:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postlady.ripe.net (postlady.ripe.net [193.0.19.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 654803A6832 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 02:05:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postlady.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MUzbt-0000qf-Le; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:01:42 +0200 Received: from dhcp-52bc.meeting.ietf.org (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AE382F583; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:01:37 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A6C1B70.6040503@ripe.net> Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:01:36 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IETF IPPM WG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d5b89c0576190e40e0a1b856ddc419b2a8 Cc: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn, Lou Berger , sunwq@mit.edu, "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A, ATTLABS" Subject: [ippm] [Fwd: IPPM expert review request] X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:05:02 -0000 IPPM Group, We received the request for a review of a document currently under discussion in the CCAMP WG, please see below. Is there anybody who has time to do this review in the near future? Matt & Henk -------- Original Message -------- Subject: IPPM expert review request Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:57:41 -0400 From: Lou Berger To: ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org CC: Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS , sunwq@mit.edu, zhangguoying Hi, We, the CCAMP WG chairs, would like to request that the IPPM WG review a draft that is progressing through the CCAMP WG. This work applies IPPM approaches to GMPLS. The document we'd like reviewed is available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-dppm-06 Is this acceptable? Can you undertake this review? Alternatively, we can just last call the document in your WG (it has already passed CCAMP WG LC). Thank you, Lou (and Deborah) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From henk@ripe.net Mon Jul 27 06:10:08 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B343A6BE1 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:10:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.792 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.792 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.807, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vc2dWobshV0O for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ripe.net [193.0.19.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE3D53A6A40 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:10:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MVPxl-0006Wz-Uk for ippm@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:10:05 +0200 Received: from dhcp-13e9.meeting.ietf.org (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D95FB2F59A for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:09:57 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A6D9643.90903@ripe.net> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:57:55 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IETF IPPM WG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d5a1f5d7b5b46361db534385fc0090f1f2 Subject: [ippm] Slides for the meeting X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:10:08 -0000 Dear All, If you plan to present in this week's IPPM meeting, then please send us your slides. Matt & Henk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From L.Liang@surrey.ac.uk Mon Jul 27 06:21:16 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32C3528C196 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:21:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tsvFbToAfvgZ for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:21:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail80.messagelabs.com (mail80.messagelabs.com [195.245.230.163]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EFED428C180 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:21:14 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: L.Liang@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-9.tower-80.messagelabs.com!1248700875!38380852!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.1.2; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [131.227.102.140] Received: (qmail 6876 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2009 13:21:15 -0000 Received: from ads40.surrey.ac.uk (HELO ads40.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.102.140) by server-9.tower-80.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 27 Jul 2009 13:21:15 -0000 Received: from EVS-EC1-NODE1.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.102.136]) by ads40.surrey.ac.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:21:14 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:21:17 +0100 Message-ID: <9AAD79EF034F824CA410417194F5F98709865A@EVS-EC1-NODE1.surrey.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <4A6D9643.90903@ripe.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Status of the multimetrics draft Thread-Index: AcoOu8ra7zCXEQorS4KsGr7dVMCvcQAAP8Ig From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jul 2009 13:21:14.0866 (UTC) FILETIME=[1E03E520:01CA0EBD] Subject: [ippm] Status of the multimetrics draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:21:16 -0000 Hi, Henk, Following Emile's question and update, I did not see any result regarding the status of the multimetrics draft. Does anyone know exactly what's happening?=20 Cheers, Lei From matt@internet2.edu Mon Jul 27 06:24:04 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11B428C180 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:24:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6JJZ5OPB3bsF for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:24:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from magus.merit.edu (magus.merit.edu [198.108.1.13]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1BA128C235 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:23:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by magus.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E18FC22557F; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:23:37 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at magus.merit.edu Received: from magus.merit.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (magus.merit.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NOeXghrH8CzF; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:23:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dhcp-23f4.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-23f4.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.35.244]) (Authenticated sender: matt@internet2.edu) by magus.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57850225565; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:23:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A6DAA57.3000104@internet2.edu> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:23:35 -0400 From: Matthew J Zekauskas User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: L.Liang@surrey.ac.uk References: <9AAD79EF034F824CA410417194F5F98709865A@EVS-EC1-NODE1.surrey.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <9AAD79EF034F824CA410417194F5F98709865A@EVS-EC1-NODE1.surrey.ac.uk> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Status of the multimetrics draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:24:04 -0000 On 7/27/09 9:21 AM, L.Liang@surrey.ac.uk wrote: > Hi, Henk, > Following Emile's question and update, I did not see any result > regarding the status of the multimetrics draft. Does anyone know exactly > what's happening? I'm afraid this one has been blocked on me. I'll work with Henk this week to make sure the document publication gets out. --Matt From L.Liang@surrey.ac.uk Mon Jul 27 07:19:42 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A32973A6C84 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 07:19:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fk0E0OGCp-nG for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 07:19:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail82.messagelabs.com (mail82.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.67]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 633E83A6C1F for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 07:19:41 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: L.Liang@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-13.tower-82.messagelabs.com!1248704374!79820261!3 X-StarScan-Version: 6.1.2; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [131.227.102.140] Received: (qmail 19518 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2009 14:19:38 -0000 Received: from ads40.surrey.ac.uk (HELO ads40.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.102.140) by server-13.tower-82.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 27 Jul 2009 14:19:38 -0000 Received: from EVS-EC1-NODE1.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.102.136]) by ads40.surrey.ac.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:19:36 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:19:40 +0100 Message-ID: <9AAD79EF034F824CA410417194F5F98709865C@EVS-EC1-NODE1.surrey.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <4A6DAA57.3000104@internet2.edu> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [ippm] Status of the multimetrics draft Thread-Index: AcoOvXWhSW1re6KWSdOp2zyec+YlmQAB8faw From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jul 2009 14:19:36.0616 (UTC) FILETIME=[45388A80:01CA0EC5] Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Status of the multimetrics draft X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:19:42 -0000 Ok, I see. Thanks Matt. Cheers, Lei -----Original Message----- From: Matthew J Zekauskas [mailto:matt@internet2.edu]=20 Sent: 27 July 2009 14:24 To: Liang L Dr (CCSR) Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Status of the multimetrics draft On 7/27/09 9:21 AM, L.Liang@surrey.ac.uk wrote: > Hi, Henk, > Following Emile's question and update, I did not see any result > regarding the status of the multimetrics draft. Does anyone know exactly > what's happening?=20 I'm afraid this one has been blocked on me. I'll work with Henk this week to make sure the document publication gets out. --Matt From henk@ripe.net Tue Jul 28 03:48:32 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4634F3A683A for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:48:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.756 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.756 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.843, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QlkwrDYdKAKm for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:48:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ripe.net [193.0.19.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE9803A67AD for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MVkDn-0000Nj-Aq; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:47:56 +0200 Received: from dhcp-13e9.meeting.ietf.org (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 260EC2F583; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:47:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A6ED756.3070609@ripe.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:47:50 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IETF IPPM WG References: <4A6C1B70.6040503@ripe.net> In-Reply-To: <4A6C1B70.6040503@ripe.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d5911e8bc61fddb065bb0b57ae48678941 Cc: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn, sunwq@mit.edu, "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A, ATTLABS" , Lou Berger Subject: Re: [ippm] [Fwd: IPPM expert review request] X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:48:32 -0000 Lou, others, > We received the request for a review of a document currently under > discussion in the CCAMP WG, please see below. Is there anybody who > has time to do this review in the near future? Reinhard Schrage (rschrage@schrageconsult.net) has voluntered to do this. Reinhard: please post anything you find to both the list and the authors. And thank you for doing this. Henk > > Matt & Henk > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: IPPM expert review request > Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:57:41 -0400 > From: Lou Berger > To: ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org > CC: Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS , sunwq@mit.edu, > zhangguoying > > Hi, > We, the CCAMP WG chairs, would like to request that the IPPM WG review > a draft that is progressing through the CCAMP WG. This work applies > IPPM approaches to GMPLS. The document we'd like reviewed is available at: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-dppm-06 > > Is this acceptable? Can you undertake this review? Alternatively, we > can just last call the document in your WG (it has already passed CCAMP > WG LC). > > Thank you, > Lou (and Deborah) > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From lberger@labn.net Tue Jul 28 05:58:23 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD6933A6F50 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:58:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.776 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.776 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.489, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jy--H9geywft for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:58:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from outbound-mail-147.bluehost.com (outbound-mail-147.bluehost.com [67.222.38.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DBE073A6F4F for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:58:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 1963 invoked by uid 0); 28 Jul 2009 12:58:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by outboundproxy5.bluehost.com with SMTP; 28 Jul 2009 12:58:24 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=labn.net; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:X-Enigmail-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=WEgsycuBQJ1JR2qVUR/5dWPPI015sbb3Z05pkKLn/XCrqv3QCqEuICCwHoEvjInMYbIE30MXCCd3I3Kx/jr3s+rIXJJjTiQnL4+5E1xy7kVOCIwEiGNJNr6tKqkPQYFo; Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MVmG8-00066o-2c; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 06:58:24 -0600 Message-ID: <4A6EF5F6.6040201@labn.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:58:30 -0400 From: Lou Berger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090408 Eudora/3.0b2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Henk Uijterwaal References: <4A6C1B70.6040503@ripe.net> <4A6ED756.3070609@ripe.net> In-Reply-To: <4A6ED756.3070609@ripe.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net} X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 06:18:55 -0700 Cc: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn, "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A, ATTLABS" , sunwq@mit.edu, IETF IPPM WG Subject: Re: [ippm] [Fwd: IPPM expert review request] X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:58:23 -0000 Hank/Reinhard, Thank you very much for undertaking this review. Please cc ccamp@ietf.org on any comments you may have. Lou On 7/28/2009 6:47 AM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > Lou, others, > >> We received the request for a review of a document currently under >> discussion in the CCAMP WG, please see below. Is there anybody who >> has time to do this review in the near future? > > Reinhard Schrage (rschrage@schrageconsult.net) has voluntered to do this. > > Reinhard: please post anything you find to both the list and the authors. > And thank you for doing this. > > Henk > >> >> Matt & Henk >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: IPPM expert review request >> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:57:41 -0400 >> From: Lou Berger >> To: ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org >> CC: Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS , sunwq@mit.edu, >> zhangguoying >> >> Hi, >> We, the CCAMP WG chairs, would like to request that the IPPM WG >> review >> a draft that is progressing through the CCAMP WG. This work applies >> IPPM approaches to GMPLS. The document we'd like reviewed is >> available at: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-dppm-06 >> >> Is this acceptable? Can you undertake this review? Alternatively, we >> can just last call the document in your WG (it has already passed CCAMP >> WG LC). >> >> Thank you, >> Lou (and Deborah) >> >> > > From henk@ripe.net Thu Jul 30 07:22:37 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DA1628C287 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:22:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.385 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.385 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.214, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H230bYxLgf8B for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:22:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ripe.net [193.0.19.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3288828C284 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:22:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from herring.ripe.net ([193.0.1.203]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MWWWb-0001HU-8T for ippm@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:22:34 +0200 Received: from dhcp-13e9.meeting.ietf.org (henk.vpn.ripe.net [193.0.21.33]) by herring.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25FCE2F583; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:22:29 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A71ACA5.4050807@ripe.net> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:22:29 +0200 From: Henk Uijterwaal User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Henk Uijterwaal References: <4A6D9643.90903@ripe.net> In-Reply-To: <4A6D9643.90903@ripe.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---- X-RIPE-Signature: e0cdef1f45f89a40ad608d255b27e7d53a4c8b414d9ec52cf68cc2801d7de1ef Cc: IETF IPPM WG Subject: Re: [ippm] Slides for the meeting X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:22:37 -0000 Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > Dear All, > > If you plan to present in this week's IPPM meeting, then please send > us your slides. > > Matt & Henk > If you haven't done this, please do so today. The meeting starts at 9am tomorrow. Henk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. From matt@internet2.edu Thu Jul 30 09:41:06 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 834DA3A6B10; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:41:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qq4rZCwx50YV; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:41:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from magus.merit.edu (magus.merit.edu [198.108.1.13]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D35C13A68FD; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:41:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by magus.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8232225151; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:41:06 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at magus.merit.edu Received: from magus.merit.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (magus.merit.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id khvnjVyBYnEv; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:41:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dhcp-32fb.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-32fb.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.50.251]) (Authenticated sender: matt@internet2.edu) by magus.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E295022526A; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:41:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A71CD1F.5060803@internet2.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:41:03 -0400 From: Matthew J Zekauskas User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lars Eggert , IETF-IESG-Support via RT X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------090402050405030202070108" Cc: IETF IPPM WG , Henk Uijterwaal , L.Liang@surrey.ac.uk, Emile Stephan , Al Morton Subject: [ippm] Publication request: draft-ietf-ippm-multimetrics-11.txt as Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:41:07 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090402050405030202070108 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The IPPM Working Group would like to request "IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) for spatial and multicast", draft-ietf-ippm-multimetrics-11.txt, as a Proposed Standard. The document shepherd writeup is attached. --Matt and Henk --------------090402050405030202070108 Content-Type: text/plain; name="draft-ietf-ippm-multimetrics-shepherd-02.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="draft-ietf-ippm-multimetrics-shepherd-02.txt" Document shepherd writeup for draft-ietf-ippm-multimetrics-11.txt, as required by rfc4858, and specified in the 17-Sep-2008 version of . (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the document and, in particular, does he or she believe this version is ready for forwarding to the IESG for publication? The document shepherd is Matt Zekauskas The document shepherd has personally reviewed this document and believes this version is read for forwarding to the IESG for publication. (1.b) Has the document had adequate review both from key WG members and from key non-WG members? Does the Document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? I believe the document has received sufficient review from key WG members, especially in the rev before and the two revs after WGLC. I don't believe there are key non-WG members that need to review the document. I have no concerns about the depth or breadth of reviews for this document. (1.c) Does the Document Shepherd have concerns that the document needs more review from a particular or broader perspective, e.g., security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, internationalization or XML? no. (1.d) Does the Document Shepherd have any specific concerns or issues with this document that the Responsible Area Director and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if the WG has discussed those issues and has indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns here. Has an IPR disclosure related to this document been filed? If so, please include a reference to the disclosure and summarize the WG discussion and conclusion on this issue. I think the AD should be aware of one potential issue. In some of the summary statistics, this document uses means of finite delays. This has been of some past controversy, and I believe it has been settled for this document; the document itself has a discussion on packet loss in section 8.1. (My view of) the issue is this: RFC 2679 (and the framework RFC 2330) treat lost packets as having infinite delay. RFC 2679 specifically avoided using means of received packet delays, and only used order statistics. If you only want to report one value, knowing that the 50th percentile of delay is infinite tells you the path is bad. Knowing only that the mean is 5mS is misleading if packet loss is 80%. (Furthermore, means imply a normal distribution, and Internet distributions tend to be far from normal.) However, the industry still uses means of finite delay, and using means can be useful in some situations, and if the mean is always reported (or at least considered) with loss and perhaps delay histograms, you can tell when it is meaningless. [Al Morton has an exposition in Section 4 of his (so far personal) draft draft-morton-ippm-reporting-metrics-06.txt.] This document was developed with an understanding of the limitations of the mean, and it was chosen for composition. There are a couple other documents in the pipeline that also have this issue. However, I can believe that it might get raised again in IETF last call, although it was not in WGLC. I know of no IPR disclosures related to this document. (1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? I think WG consensus behind this document is fairly strong at this point, although I think there has been more silence on this document than some of the other recent ones. (1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is entered into the ID Tracker.) no. (1.g) Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the document satisfies all ID nits? (See http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html and http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. Has the document met all formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB Doctor, media type and URI type reviews? Yes. There are no other area formal reviews needed. (1.h) Has the document split its references into normative and informative? Are there normative references to documents that are not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? If such normative references exist, what is the strategy for their completion? Are there normative references that are downward references, as described in [RFC3967]? If so, list these downward references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure for them [RFC3967]. References are split and appropriate. There are no downward refs, nor normative refs to wait for. There is one non-normative work-in-progress reference (to Spatial Composition of Metrics) that has a new revision number, but the reference is still appropriate and would be referenced as a work in progress rather than specific version number. (1.i) Has the Document Shepherd verified that the document IANA consideration section exists and is consistent with the body of the document? If the document specifies protocol extensions, are reservations requested in appropriate IANA registries? Are the IANA registries clearly identified? If the document creates a new registry, does it define the proposed initial contents of the registry and an allocation procedure for future registrations? Does it suggest a reasonable name for the new registry? See [RFC5226]. If the document describes an Expert Review process has Shepherd conferred with the Responsible Area Director so that the IESG can appoint the needed Expert during the IESG Evaluation? The IANA consideration section exists, and is consistent with the other documents from IPPM and RFC 4148, which describes the IPPM Metrics Registry. (1.j) Has the Document Shepherd verified that sections of the document that are written in a formal language, such as XML code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc., validate correctly in an automated checker? The only section where this could apply is the IANA Considerations section, where IANA is asked to register the metrics in the IPPM Metrics Registry. The entries given are proper form with respect to RFC 4148, which defined the registry. (1.k) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document Announcement Write-Up? Recent examples can be found in the "Action" announcements for approved documents. The approval announcement contains the following sections: Technical Summary The IETF has standardized IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) for measuring end-to-end performance between two points. This memo defines two new categories of metrics that extend the coverage to multiple measurement points. It defines spatial metrics for measuring the performance of segments of a source to destination path, and metrics for measuring the performance between a source and many destinations in multiparty communications (e.g., a multicast tree). The scope of this memo is limited to metrics using a single source packet or stream, and observations of corresponding packets along the path (spatial), at one or more destinations (one-to-group), or both. Note that all the metrics defined herein are based on observations of packets dedicated to testing, a process that is called active measurement. Passive measurement (for example, a spatial metric based on the observation of user traffic) is beyond the scope of this memo. Working Group Summary The working group input has improved this document through its revisions, and the document itself has been uncontroversial. Document Quality I know of no current implementations that claim to implement this metric. However, other implementers in the group have read the draft. --------------090402050405030202070108-- From matt@internet2.edu Thu Jul 30 09:48:15 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 765CB3A6C96 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:48:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kThFcoFUaZGl for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:48:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from magus.merit.edu (magus.merit.edu [198.108.1.13]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9EA3A6995 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:48:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by magus.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56E8D22591F for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:48:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at magus.merit.edu Received: from magus.merit.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (magus.merit.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RY25RN+3W37Q for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:48:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dhcp-32fb.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-32fb.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.50.251]) (Authenticated sender: matt@internet2.edu) by magus.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F622225917 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:48:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A71CECD.6060302@internet2.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:48:13 -0400 From: Matthew J Zekauskas User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IETF IPPM WG X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [ippm] Remote Participation Details for IPPM at IETF 75 X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:48:15 -0000 If you plan to join remotely, we start tomorrow (Friday) 0900 local time in Stockholm. Assuming the Audio stream is working, please join it: (we will be in room 307) All the latest versions of the slides received will be posted here by meeting time: Jabber info: http://www.ietf.org/meeting/75/jabber.html (we will monitor jabber, do not expect that the session will be completely scribed there!) --Matt (Thanks to Al Morton for the bmwg version of this note, which I took from liberally.) From dave.mcdysan@verizon.com Fri Jul 31 00:59:46 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ippm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B89828C182 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:59:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.264 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.335, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4aQLKb91Ua-4 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:59:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpamail2.verizon.com (tpamail2.verizon.com [192.76.82.136]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B5133A6C81 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:59:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpftw3.verizon.com (smtpftw3.verizon.com [138.83.140.92]) by tpamail2.verizon.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n6V7xirw004769 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:59:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ftwccout01.verizon.com (ftwccout01.verizon.com [138.83.131.134]) by smtpftw3.verizon.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n6V7xYPK005811 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:59:44 -0400 (EDT) X-AuditID: 8a538386-b7b71ae000000a3d-84-4a72a470e0cd Received: from smtptpa3.verizon.com ( [138.83.71.176]) by ftwccout01.verizon.com (EMF) with SMTP id DF.71.02621.074A27A4; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:59:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from FHDP1CCMXCG02.us.one.verizon.com ([166.68.240.34]) by smtptpa3.verizon.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n6V7xgQ1029184 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:59:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from FHDP1LUMXCV14.us.one.verizon.com ([166.68.125.35]) by FHDP1CCMXCG02.us.one.verizon.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:59:42 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:56:24 -0400 Message-ID: <793F49BA1FC821409F99F10862A0E4DB037E7CE4@FHDP1LUMXCV14.us.one.verizon.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: More Information on Question re: draft-morton-ippm-reporting-metrics-07 Thread-Index: AcoRtGZKLruMerwVRyCN4/5+V771jQ== From: "Mcdysan, David E" To: "IETF IPPM WG" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Jul 2009 07:59:42.0673 (UTC) FILETIME=[DC9FDC10:01CA11B4] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:03:54 -0700 Subject: [ippm] More Information on Question re: draft-morton-ippm-reporting-metrics-07 X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:59:46 -0000 Below is the document I had in mind when I made a comment in the meeting today regarding long-term performance and how that relates to availability.=20 Section 7 of Y.1540 http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Y.1540-200711-I/en As I understand the subject draft, the implicit assumption is that the service is always "available" as defined by the above reference. Agreement on a time interval (e.g., 5 minutes) for when a service is available (or not) and the PM (e.g., loss) threshold is an important component of current commercial SLAs, where "long-term" is often on the order of a month. The period of time Tav (e.g., 5 minutes), the criteria and threshold (e.g., loss >25%) and minimum number of packets over which to compute the threshold comparison (i.e., Mav) are things that could be made a stronger recommendation to be less vague. Alternatively, a long term performance measurement could state these parameters. Including measurements of delay, delay variation, loss in the subject draft that would be considered unavailable in the ITU-T definition cited above would seem to potentially skew the distribution.=20 I recommend that some mention of availability be made in section 6.2, Long-Term Reporting Considerations, possibly after (or near) the following statement: "When the reporting interval contains many measurement intervals it is possible to present the results as "metric A was less than or equal to objective X during Y% of time." Thanks, Dave