Re: [IPFIX] draft-ietf-ipfix-a9n
Brian Trammell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipfix |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Feb 24, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Rahul Patel wrote: >>>> Section 5.1.1 Distributing values across Interval >>>> ------------------------------------------------- >>>> * should add 'synchronized expiry of Original Flows' - Under this >>>> method >>>> Flow C would be exported three times with start-time/end-time >>>> matching the >>>> aggregation interval start-time/end-time. >> Make sense to me. >>>> >>>> * There will always going to some original flows which will arrive late >>>> and will not be accounted. It will be good have a cumulative counter of >>>> such late arrivals on per template id (aggregated flow) basis. This >>>> cumulative count should be periodically exported along with end-time >>>> (time-of-snapshot). The counter will provide a degree of confidence >>>> in the >>>> data exported by the aggregator for each template. >> So you want something similar to "The Metering Process Statistics Option >> Template" from RFC5101, http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5101#page-23, but >> for the Aggregation Intermediate Aggregation Process, right? > > [RP] exactly. Still not convinced this is needed given the nature of active timeouts; however, that may well be an implementation-specific (or application-specific) opinion. In that case, I agree we should add it but I'm not convinced that this is an aggregation-specific thing. If you're going to count records that were dropped at an intermediate process due to missing a time window, couldn't this affect non-aggregation intermediate processes as well? How about adding this to MEDPROTO instead? Best regards, Brian _______________________________________________ IPFIX mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix