[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Measurement Process -> Metering Process



Hi Juergen and Benoit,

I support Juergens view. Its consistent with IPFIX and thus easier to
understand for those who already implemented IPFIX (which I guess will be
the majority).

Thomas

-- 
Thomas Dietz                       E-mail: Thomas.Dietz@netlab.nec.de
Network Laboratories               Phone:  +49 6221 90511-28
NEC Europe Ltd.                    Fax:    +49 6221 90511-55
Kurfuersten-Anlage 36
69115 Heidelberg, Germany          http://www.netlab.nec.de
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-psamp@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-psamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen Quittek
> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 12:24 PM
> To: Benoit Claise
> Cc: psamp
> Subject: Re: Measurement Process -> Metering Process
> 
> --On 21.12.2005 11:37 Uhr +0100 Benoit Claise wrote:
> 
> > Juergen Quittek wrote:
> >
> > Hi Benoit,
> >
> > Thanks for elaborating this change.
> > Please find a comment in line.
> >
> > --On 19.12.2005 17:28 Uhr +0100 Benoit Claise wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I applied the editorial changes.
> >
> > 1. I deleted the definition of "Reporting Process"
> > 2. I removed/replaced all remaining occurrence of 
> "Reporting Process"
> >     btw, as a consequence, I updated the definitions of 
> "packet report", "report interpretation", "report stream"
> > 3. I deleted the definition of "Measurement Process"
> > 4. I modified all remaining occurrence of "Measurement 
> Process" by "Selection Process"
> >    btw, as a consequence, I modified the definitions of 
> "Exporting Process"
> >    I also modified the different requirements from 
> [PSAMP-FMWK] that I was quoting in section 6.
> >    As a consequence, [PSAMP-FMWK] will have to be updated 
> accordingly.
> >
> > Then, the figure becomes.
> >
> >
> >                +---------+      +---------+
> >      Observed  |Selection|      |Exporting|
> >      Packet--->|Process  |----->|Process  |--->Collector
> >      Stream    +---------+      +---------+
> >               \--Metering-/
> >                \-Process-/
> >
> >      Figure B: PSAMP Processes
> >
> >
> > Shouldn't it be just
> >
> >               +---------+      +---------+
> >     Observed  |Metering |      |Exporting|
> >     Packet--->|Process  |----->|Process  |--->Collector
> >     Stream    +---------+      +---------+
> >
> > ?
> 
> I would use this figure for showing consistency with IPFIX.
> We can explain in the text that the metering process contains
> a selection process (as it does in IPFIX).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>     Juergen
> 
> > Personally, this is what I would prefer. It makes more sense.
> > However, I was perfectly clear on the conclusions from the 
> meeting in Vancouver (this is reason why I started this thread)
> > From the meeting minutes at 
> http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/05nov/minutes/psamp.txt
> >
> > Open Issue (not numbered): Terminology Metering Process (IPFIX) vs.
> > Measurement Process(PSAMP)
> > Terminology problem: When psamp started it wasn't clear 
> that ipfix would be
> > chosen for export, the architecture is similar but still 
> different. What IPFIX
> > calls "metering" is defined as "measurement" in PSAMP terminology.
> > Juergen: Let's use term "metering" for both. Shall we also 
> drop terms
> > "selection process" and "reporting process"?
> > Tanja: Keep selection process as part of metering process 
> (is in line with
> > IPFIX, because metering process can contain sampling/filtering). But
> > selection process should be kept.
> > Nick: I agree.
> > Juergen: The changes need to be applied also to the 
> framework draft and the
> > packet selection draft that are currently in AD review.
> >
> >
> > Juergen, I would be perfectly happy to edit the diagram as 
> you draw it.
> >
> > Regards, Benoit.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The same steps from 1 to 4 will have to be executed for 
> [PSAMP-FMWK] and [PSAMP-TECH]. Alternatively, you might copy 
> the new definitions from the next [PSAMP-PROTO] version.
> >
> > Regards, Benoit.
> >
> >
> >  Dear all,
> >
> > Do I understand correctly from the meeting minutes (below) 
> that we get rid of the Reporting Process.
> >
> >
> >
> > Open Issue (not numbered): Terminology Metering Process (IPFIX) vs.
> >   Measurement Process(PSAMP)
> > Terminology problem: When psamp started it wasn't clear 
> that ipfix would be
> > chosen for export, the architecture is similar but still 
> different. What IPFIX
> > calls "metering" is defined as "measurement" in PSAMP terminology.
> > Juergen: Let's use term "metering" for both.  Shall we also 
> drop terms
> >   "selection process" and "reporting process"?
> > Tanja: Keep selection process as part of metering process 
> (is in line with
> >   IPFIX, because metering process can contain 
> sampling/filtering).  But
> >   selection process should be kept.
> > Nick: I agree.
> > Juergen: The changes need to be applied also to the 
> framework draft and the
> >   packet selection draft that are currently in AD review.
> >
> >
> > Without objections, I will be removing the concept of 
> Reporting Process in [PSAMP-PROTO].
> > Anyway, we don't need it in the protocol.
> >
> > Regards, Benoit.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Tanja, Nick, and al.
> >
> > Regarding the "Measurement Process -> Metering Process" 
> issue discussed during the IETF meeting, I understand that:
> > - the Measurement Process definition disappears
> > - we replace all instances of Measurement Process by 
> (IPFIX) Metering Process
> > - we keep the Selection Process
> >
> > I was not too clear about the following point:
> > - do we keep the Reporting Process?
> >    There is actually no information about it (no such thing 
> such as Reporting Process ID)
> >    This is just a concept, right?
> >
> > Regards, Benoit.
> >
> >
> > --
> > to unsubscribe send a message to psamp-request@ops.ietf.org with
> > the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> > archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/psamp/>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> to unsubscribe send a message to psamp-request@ops.ietf.org with
> the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/psamp/>
> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature