Re: [IPFIX] obsoleting obsoletion in 5102-bis and IE-DOCTORS
Brian Trammell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipfix |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Aug 22, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Paul Aitken wrote:
> Brian,
>
> No objection.
>
> Consider VRRP: although VRRP v2 (RFC 3768) was obsoleted by VRRP v3 (RFC 5798), v2 is still in common use.
>
> We should expect the same for IPFIX IEs: obsolete IEs may continue in use for many years because people are unaware, unable, or simply unwilling to update.
>
> Can IANA record the obsolescence date individually for each field?
Yep. From IE-DOCTORS (current -04 working copy):
The revision number of an Information Element is incremented upon deprecation, and the revision date updated.
> Reviewing draft-ietf-ipfix-ie-doctors-03,
>
> The use of deprecated Information Elements SHOULD result
> in a log entry or human-readable warning at the Exporting and
> Collecting Processes.
>
>
> That's just not possible. How can an existing EP know that its IEs have been deprecated? - Unless it's able to reference IANA, and method (1) of yesterday's discussion is in use.
An EP using a deprecated IE sending to a CP using a deprecated IE has in essence no problem -- sure, they're deprecated, but they're interoperating ("living in the past") one could say.
As soon as _one_ of them is updated, though, then one of them SHOULD log (within reason - once per IE per runtime should suffice, but this is an implementation detail).
How about "the use of IEs known by a CP or an EP to be deprecated"...?
> However, that's not desirable since it allows a third party (whoever causes the IANA deprecation) to cause warnings to appear in your tried and tested and perfectly good EP - CP setup.
Which is the last remaining question on IE-DOCTORS, and the short version of the other thread: to remove ESIE Reference from IE-DOCTORS or not?
Cheers,
Brian
> On 22/08/12 12:37, Brian Trammell wrote:
>> Greetings, all,
>>
>> Following the discussion in Vancouver, I propose to modify RFC5102-bis and the IE-DOCTORS draft to remove the 'obsolete' status; the arguments presented there that two different ways to say "this IE is dead" don't really reflect operational realities seem to me to be pretty convincing.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Brian
>> _______________________________________________
>> IPFIX mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix
_______________________________________________
IPFIX mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix