Re: [IPFIX] exporting ranges in IPFIX
Paul Aitken <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipfix |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Andrew, > This seems useful, but out of curiousity, why "Number of ports in > block" instead of "Port block end". Because (step size) x (number of steps) clearly identifies the end, whereas (end - start) might not divide evenly by (size). ie, starting at 1000, with a step size of 10, ending at 1195... the last value is ambiguous. Should we stop before or after 1195? Whereas starting at 1000, with 20 steps of 10, the last value is unambiguous. P. > On 06/05/2012 11:29 AM, Paul Aitken wrote: >> Dear IPFIX experts, >> >> As far as I know, IPFIX doesn't have a generic mechanism for >> reporting ranges. >> >> I'm looking for a way to report bulk port allocation per section 5 of >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-behave-lsn-requirements-05. >> >> This method would be useful for reporting port ranges in >> draft-tsou-behave-natx4-log-reduction-02 and >> draft-bajko-pripaddrassign-04. >> >> So I propose to request three new IPFIX Information Elements: >> >> Port block start: 16 bits >> Port block step size 8 bits >> Number of ports in block 16 bits >> >> >> However, there could be better ways to export a "range" which don't >> require three new IEs each time. Do you forsee a need for a such a >> mechanism? >> >> Shall I proceed with my request to IANA? If so, should I write a >> short ID explaining how the three IEs should be used together? >> >> Thanks, >> P. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> IPFIX mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix > _______________________________________________ IPFIX mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix