[IPFIX] One more feedback on XML: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-13.txt

Dear authors,

One more feedback, and a question for the WG
Based on feedback received from the OPS DIRECTORATE on RFC5102bis, the 
following was inserted
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipfix-information-model-rfc5102bis-10#section-7.3

    The reference to the current schema is embedded in the registry
    [IPFIX-IANA  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipfix-information-model-rfc5102bis-10#ref-IPFIX-IANA>]; this schema may change from time to time as necessary
    to support the maintenance of the registry. As such, the schema
    urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:ipfix-info [IPFIX-XML-SCHEMA  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipfix-information-model-rfc5102bis-10#ref-IPFIX-XML-SCHEMA>] specified in
    [RFC5102  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5102>] has been deprecated.

Should the IPFIX draft remove the reference to the RFC5102 xsd?
Typically for this draft, it means removing the appendix A 
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-13#appendix-A)
Personally, I believe it makes sense to remove it.

Regards, Benoit (as a contributor)
> Dear authors,
>
> Looking at the diff, I have the following feedback.
>
> flowSelectorAlgorithm is a new IE, to be registered by IANA
> I see this in section 7.1:
>
>     New assignments for the registry will be administered by
>     IANA and are subject to Expert Review [RFC5226  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226>].
>
> This new registry should be in the IANA considerations section.
> For an example of the IANA considerations, see 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6313#section-11.3
> So the section 7.1 to 7.11 should be in the IANA considerations section.
>
> Also, in that registry, I see:
>     +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
>     |TBDx| Flow-state Dependent   | No agreed Parameters     |
>     |    | Intermediate Flow      |                          |
>     |    | Selection Process      |                          |
>     +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
> This should be
>     +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
>     |  9 | Flow-state Dependent   | No agreed Parameters     |
>     |    | Intermediate Flow      |                          |
>     |    | Selection Process      |                          |
>     +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
> On this last point, I realized that I mislead you. Mea culpa.
>
> I see  in section 7.x
>     Status: Proposed
> The status should be "current"
>
> Really, http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6313#section-11.3 is a good example.
>
> And finally, there are new fields in 
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xml since you posted you 
> version. For example "revision". Instruct IANA that they need to put 
> the value 0.
>
> These comments can be taken into account part of the WGLC to come. Up 
> to chairs to decide.
>
> Regards, Benoit
>> A new version (-13) has been submitted for draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech:
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-13.txt
>>
>> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech/
>>
>> Diff from previous version:
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-13
>>
>> IETF Secretariat.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPFIX mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix

_______________________________________________
IPFIX mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix