Re: [IPFIX] review of draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export-07
Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> Mon, 5 Jan 2015 16:19:41 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipfix |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Paul, I think the example should either be a real-world example or there needs to be a clear warning somewhere that this example is not a real-world example in order to prevent people from coding along the example and then coming up with ideas such as white space padding interface names to make them fixed-length 16 octets long. There are programmers who code along examples instead of reading the underlying specifications and they sometimes end up being (too) creative. I guess my preference is to show a realistic example but if I am the only one, then of course I will go along with what we have (but I would appreciate that there is a warning somewhere that this example makes simplifying assumptions). /js On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 11:09:14AM +0100, Paul Aitken wrote: > Juergen, thanks for your careful review and all your feedback. I've addressed all your points except one: > > - p46: Why is the Field Length of mibObjectValueOctetString set to 16? > The interface names in general have variable length. > > Fixed length is used to simplify the example data record in figure 31. > > Although interfaces generally do have variable length names, I believe the example is clearer with fixed length fields. > > Changing to variable length would be straightforward if the consensus is that it's more realistic example. > > P. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IPFIX [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder > > Sent: 17 December 2014 14:19 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [IPFIX] review of draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export-07 > > > > Hi, > > > > here is my review of draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export-07. Most of the > > comments are editorial or bug fixes. There is only one real technical concern > > related to the encoding of BITS. The current I-D uses a 64-bit unsigned integer, > > which limits things to 64 bit positions. The SMIv2 does not have this limit - it only > > warns about bit positions in excess of 128. > > > > - RFC4293 is listed as a normative reference but as far as I can tell > > it is only used in an example. I suggest to make this an informative > > reference. > > > > - p3: 2nd paragraph Introduction: I am not sure the statement "there > > are no dependencies between the SMIv2 and the SNMP protocol" is > > correct. Perhaps the simplest fix is to simply delete the whole > > paragraph. > > > > - p4: 1st paragraph Motivation: The 2nd sentence is hard to follow. > > > > - p5: s/does not specify SNMP notifications/does not specify how to > > carry SNMP notifications in IPFIX/ > > > > - p9: s/in a certain MIB/in a certain MIB module/ > > > > - p10: s/may be also be/may also be/ > > > > - p10: s/described by the MIB./described by the MIB module./ > > > > - p14: s/when when/when/ > > > > - p14: s/references sections/referenced sections/ > > > > The fact that every listed item refers to two sections may be a bit > > confusing, perhaps change to > > > > o mibIndexIndicator (defined in Section 5.8.5, example in Section 11.2.2.3) > > > > - p20: It took me a while to spot the difference between Fig. 7 and > > Fig.8 (I did not immediately spot that the fields are > > swapped). Perhaps mention this more explicitly in the last paragraph > > on p19? > > > > Figure 7 shows an IPFIX Options Template Set using Scope Existing > > IFPIX IE and a Non Scope mibObjectValueInteger IE, while Figure 8 > > shows an IPFIX Options Template Set using a Scope > > mibObjectValueInteger IE and a Non Scope Existing IFPIX IE. > > > > - p12: s/name of the MIB/name of the MIB module/ > > > > - p26: s/present the same order/present in the same order/ > > > > - p32: s/not defined as possible/not possible/ > > > > - p37: s/CISCO-PROCESS_MIB/CISCO-PROCESS-MIB/ > > > > - p45: s/ifMTU/ifMtu/ (this shows up several time, do a global replace) > > > > - p46: Why is the Field Length of mibObjectValueOctetString set to 16? > > The interface names in general have variable length. > > > > - p47: why 'ifName = ""'? > > > > - p52: s/index by IEs:/indexed by IEs:/ > > > > - p58: The VLEN and the OID value seem to be wrong. I think this should > > be VLEN=10 and the OID value 06082B060102010E0A01. > > > > - p61: I would have named SNMPtotalCounter simply snmpCounter and I > > would have named SNMPgauge snmpGauge. If this change is > > adopted, then these names needs to be changed in several > > places. > > > > - p64: The encoding of mibObjectValueBits may need to specify how the > > bit positions are counted. That said, there is an issue here > > with using unsigned64. RFC 2578 does not restrict the bit > > positions, it only warns that using bit positions in excess of > > 128 may cause interoperability problems. The IPFIX I-D > > essentially limits this to 64 bits. The obvious solution is to > > follow the SNMP encoding rules that encode bits into an octet > > string (an octetArray in IPFIX speak). > > > > - p67: s/as defined in a MIB// > > > > - p68: OLD > > > > Description: A non-negative sub-identifier. One Sub number from > > an Object Identifier (OID). > > > > NEW > > > > Description: A non-negative sub-identifier of an Object > > Identifier (OID). > > > > - p69: s/was retrieved from SNMP/was retrieved from the MIB/ > > > > - p70: s/could be sampled by SNMP/has been sampled/ > > > > - p70: s/SNMP sampling time/sampling time/ > > > > /js > > > > -- > > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany > > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > IPFIX mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ IPFIX mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix