Re: Open Issue 6: Associations ID -> Selection Path

[Tanja Zseby <zseby@fokus.fraunhofer.de>]

Hi Benoit,

I also prefer Selection Path.

Kind regards,
Tanja

Benoit Claise wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> The PSAMP open issue 6 is the following:
>
>    Even if the notion of Associations ID is mentioned in [PSAMP-TECH],
>    maybe a term such as SelectionPath or PathID would be more 
> appropriate.
>
> The background of this issue is the following.
> [PSAMP-TECH] specifies the Associations ID like this:
>
>    ASSOCIATIONS        Values: <STREAM ID, IPFIX Metering process ID, 
> IPFIX Exporting    process ID, IDs of other associated processes>    
> With STREAM ID: Observation point ID AND List of SELECTOR_IDs
> However, we concluded during the last IETF meeting that we don't need 
> the IPFIX Metering and Exporting Process ID.
> So we're left with:
>
>    Values: <Observation point ID, List of SELECTOR_IDs>
>
> Since we don't associate anymore the observation point with processes, 
> it was proposed to change the name:
> from "Associations ID" to "Selection Path" or "Path ID".
>
> Personally, I prefer the Selection Path term, along with the 
> selectionPath I.E.
> For the simple reason that we speak of selection methods all over in 
> the PSAMP drafts.
>
> Feedback?
>
> Regards, Benoit.

--
Dipl.-Ing. Tanja Zseby			    	      	
Fraunhofer Institute FOKUS			Email: zseby@fokus.fraunhofer.de	
Kaiserin-Augusta-Allee 31			Phone: +49-30-3463-7153
D-10589 Berlin, Germany				Fax:   +49-30-3463-8153
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
"Living on earth is expensive but it includes a free trip around the sun." (Anonymous)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--
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/>