Re: [IPFIX] [Sender: [email protected]] RFC5101: time first flow dropped and time last flow dropped

Dear all,

On 21.09.2011 21:46, Gerhard Muenz wrote:
[...]
> We do not have selectorId, exportingProcessId, and meteringProcessId in
> the configuration data model. If we think about adding
> meteringProcessId, it may be worth thinking about the other IDs as well.
>
> I do not see a problem if these are defined as state parameters (e.g.
> read-only).
>
> selectorId is a bit different because the scope is OD, not IPFIX device.
> Therefore, the same ID value may appear for different Selectors of the
> same device.

I found that we had an internal discussion about selectorId back in 
2010. The conclusion was twofold:

1) It is not possible to simply add a single selectorId parameter per 
Selector because Selector ID is only unique per Observation Domain and 
not per PSAMP Device. Similarly to selectionSequenceId, only a list of 
tuples (observationDomainId,selectorId) would make sense in the 
configuration model.

2) selectorId is actually not needed in the configuration model because 
we already have the tuples (observationDomainId,selectionSequenceId) 
which allow associating "Selection Sequence Report Interpretation" and 
"Selection Sequence Statistics Report Interpretation" with the 
corresponding Selection Process in the configuration model.

So, I will only add exportingProcessId and meteringProcessId.

If somebody thinks of writing an RFC5476bis, I suggest to broaden the 
scope of selectorId and selectionSequenceId from Observation Domain to 
PSAMP Device in order to be consistent with meteringProcessId and 
exportingProcessId.

Gerhard
_______________________________________________
IPFIX mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix