Re: [IPFIX] RFC 3550 jitter

Dear all,

I received feedback that the name should include "mean" and 'rfc3550', 
since there are other jitter metrics which take into account all samples 
rather than running average based last 16 samples as done by RFC3550.

So the proposed names could be rfc3550JitterMeanMilliseconds, 
rfc3550JitterMeanMicroseconds, and rfc3550JitterMeanNanoseconds.

P.


On 28/11/12 15:25, Paul Aitken wrote:
> Dear IPFIX experts,
>
> I'd like to request an IPFIX IE for jitter from IANA. RFC 3550 defines 
> a suitable "interarrival jitter". Unfortunately it's measured in 
> "timestamp units":
>
>       An estimate of the statistical variance of the RTP data packet
>       interarrival time, measured in timestamp units and expressed as an
>       unsigned integer.
>
>
> Therefore it seems we may need multiple IEs: one for units of 
> milliseconds, one for microseconds, one for nanoseconds...
> Else comparison of two jitter values would be meaningless.
>
> So I request your feedback on the following:
>
> Name: interarrivalJitterMilliseconds
> Type: unsigned32
> Semantic: quantity
> Description: interarrival jitter as defined in section 6.4.1 of RFC 
> 3550, measured in milliseconds.
> Units: milliseconds
> References: [RFC3550]
>
> Name: interarrivalJitterMicroseconds
> Type: unsigned32
> Semantic: quantity
> Description: interarrival jitter as defined in section 6.4.1 of RFC 
> 3550, measured in microseconds.
> Units: microseconds
> References: [RFC3550]
>
> Name: interarrivalJitterNanoseconds
> Type: unsigned32
> Semantic: quantity
> Description: interarrival jitter as defined in section 6.4.1 of RFC 
> 3550, measured in nanoseconds.
> Units: nanoseconds
> References: [RFC3550]
>
> 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