Re: [IPFIX] IPFIX length fields
Andrew Feren <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipfix |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Chris, The datatype is IPAddress. Why do you also need a semantic type of IPAddress? -Andrew On 03/28/2012 07:33 AM, Chris Inacio wrote: > > I vote to keep IPaddress as a semantic type. Because I can do things like masking / subnetting, etc. when it is an IPAddress - but I don't think about doing that with an identifier. > > We are currently implementing stuff the depends on IP (v4/v6) as a semantic meaning. > > I assume I can do pretty much *nothing* intelligent operationally, masking, flags, ranges, summation, etc. with identifier. Only key matching. But I know I can do more with an IP address. > > Chris > > > On Mar 1, 2012, at 6:07 PM, Paul Aitken wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> Reviewing IANA's IPFIX field list, we noticed that most of the *length fields have no semantics. >> >> However, mplsTopLabelPrefixLength has semantics of "identifier", while ethernetHeaderLength, ethernetPayloadLength, ethernetTotalLength have semantics of "identifier". >> >> We propose that these all be changed to no semantics. >> >> Or better, that all lengths be changed to semantics of "quantity", since RFC5102 says, >> 3.2.1. quantity >> >> A quantity value represents a discrete measured value pertaining to >> the record. This is distinguished from counters that represent an >> ongoing measured value whose "odometer" reading is captured as part >> of a given record. >> If no semantic qualifier is given, the >> Information Elements that have an integral data type should behave as >> a quantity. >> >> >> Feedback? >> >> Thanks, >> Paul and Nick >> <ATT00001.c> > _______________________________________________ > IPFIX mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix _______________________________________________ IPFIX mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix