Re: [IPFIX] Export of long lived flow information
John Court <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipfix |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <OF4B5A9A3A.F88C734E-ONCA257AA2.0005120F-4A257AA2.0005F365@au1.ibm.com> |
Yep I think everyone is starting to see the ambiguity that needs to be cleared up :-) Paul, Definitely. If it's a permanent flow and you're exporting totalCount fields - which are measured "since the Metering Process (re-)initialization for this Observation Point" - then the flowStartTime must surely be the time the first ever packet was observed. If you take that literally shouldn't that be interpreted to mean that the totalCount continues into the next time a connection is up between the same flow key ? Even if a flowEndReason of : 0x03: end of Flow detected The Flow was terminated because the Metering Process detected signals indicating the end of the Flow, for example, the TCP FIN flag. That clearly wouldn't be of much use IMO and makes it difficult to see what the flowEndReason field semantics mean in that context. Just pointing out that taking that definition literally doesn't give a useful answer on its own either :-). Although maybe that does make sense in a router context ? Can you clarify this some more, perhaps you never intend using the flowEndReason IE in your case ? Thanks From: Paul Aitken <[email protected]> To: Andrew Johnson <[email protected]>, Cc: Gerhard Muenz <[email protected]>, John Court/Australia/IBM@IBMAU, [email protected] Date: 25/10/2012 08:07 Subject: Re: [IPFIX] Export of long lived flow information Andrew, > I was thinking that a mechanism that allowed a non-permanent flow to be exported multiple time would be useful. For example, security applications generally want to know about a new flow ASAP, so they can act on the information, but a short active timeout values lead to using more export bandwidth. I was thinking we could do something like export a report of the flow after the first packet, and then export the final version of the flow once the normal timeouts had decided it was over. I have in the past discussed the idea of exporting a "new flow alert" using zero-valued counters in order to make the collector aware that we've started monitoring it - so I'm claiming prior art on that. > I had in mind something like using a delta count, followed by a total count. Reading the below definition of Total counts though, I'm not sure that will work, but I think it depends on how we interpret the definition of "Flow". If two records have matching key fields but different starting timestamps, are they the same Flow? 5101 defines: A Flow is defined as a set of IP packets passing an Observation Point in the network during a certain time interval. - so it's all about the timestamps :-) > I would argue that a single Flow can't have two flowStartTimes, so maybe not. However, two flows with different flowStartTimes can be merged into one flow. > This would mean that we shouldn't reset the flowStartTimes between sending reports for the same permanent Flow. Definitely. If it's a permanent flow and you're exporting totalCount fields - which are measured "since the Metering Process (re-)initialization for this Observation Point" - then the flowStartTime must surely be the time the first ever packet was observed. P. _______________________________________________ IPFIX mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix