Re: [IPFIX] IPFIX at IETF 89, London

Paul,

At this point, I will be listening to the chairs to see  ...
     if this is really "interesting",
     if there is enough support from the IPFIX community,
     if there is enough discussion on it,
     and if this work could be done in the decent time.

(*) I guess that I'm so much involved in IPFIX that I have strong 
opinions about your drafts. That's the price you pay for an AD who knows 
IPFIX by heart.

Regards, Benoit
> Benoit,
>
>>> I've presented these ideas in previous WG meetings, where the 
>>> consensus was to wait for the next re-charter.
>> Consensus, sure?
>
> Yes: the work was interesting, but not relevant to the current 
> charter. So, bring it up at the next recharter - which hasn't happened 
> yet.
>
>
>> I checked the meeting minutes and I don't see that.
>> What I recall is that two different proposals were discussed 
>> (draft-aitken-ipfix-equivalent-ies and draft-inacio-ipfix-penie-00), 
>> with no clear winner.
>
> Sure; each of these drafts has different merits. It would be up to the 
> WG to decide on the best solution.
>
> Look, here's a real problem in IPFIX which has resulted in not one but 
> *two* different drafts trying to solve it in different ways. Do you 
> propose to ignore it?
>
> P.
> .
>

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