Re: [IPFIX] Search comments and feedbacks about the draft of IPFIX IE extension when considering BGP community
PJ Aitken <[email protected]> Wed, 20 Jul 2016 15:49:06 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipfix |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--===============7531473546471376163== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------84B4FD6F1AE96AB2BABB0262" --------------84B4FD6F1AE96AB2BABB0262 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When a draft specifies one of the list types, should it also specify the=20 type of the list elements and the expected semantics? Else we could have non-interoperable implementations exporting the same=20 "IANA standard" information element, where one is a "basicList of X"=20 while another is a "basicList of Y". ie, although the IE is the same, the basicList Field ID and semantics=20 are different. See RFC 6313, Figure 1.) eg, the BGP community draft referenced below creates a new=20 bgpSourceCommunityList. I suppose this may be a list of=20 bgpSourceAsNumber, but that's not specified in the draft - so it could=20 equally be a list of sourceIPv4Address or any other IE. Alternatively, devices could simply export IE #291 (basicList), with the=20 bgpSourceCommunityList and bgpDestinationCommunityList disambiguated by=20 the basicList Field ID contained in the basicList header. However that=20 would be horrendous for collectors... P. On 20/07/16 08:12, Benoit Claise wrote: > Dear all, > > We know that the IANA considerations=20 > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__tools.ietf.org_= html_rfc7012-23section-2D7&d=3DCwMDEA&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DXx97= 29xYDYoCgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed= 3zfEKAlZ4zaux4&s=3DPT25lVmWADTBAoRFJls07fJ6PTOd2XWc0L4bTWxB3MY&e=3D>=20 > mentions "expert review" for the IPFIX registry=20 > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__www.iana.org_as= signments_ipfix_ipfix.xhtml&d=3DCwMDEA&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DXx9= 729xYDYoCgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBe= d3zfEKAlZ4zaux4&s=3Dtbt3wdaVgevcKVTqBEKX_MhNO7g_oaW3XiywAp65WgY&e=3D>. > This BGP community is actually a special IPFIX Information Element as=20 > this is the first one based on RFC 6313=20 > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__tools.ietf.org_= html_rfc6313&d=3DCwMDEA&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DXx9729xYDYoCgBDdcp= 1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed3zfEKAlZ4zaux4= &s=3DR9ipRubr7eEQrMnskDLzBjeZqhpnmefnWc59t3_ab7s&e=3D>(basicList,=20 > subTemplateList, subTemplateMultiList) > So it deserves special attention, review, and potential documentation=20 > as its own RFC. > > Regards, Benoit > >> Hi, dear all. >> >> Nice meeting you in the mail-list of IPFIX. This IETF in Berlin right=20 >> now, we submit a draft and present it about the IPFIX IE extension=20 >> when considering BGP community. I=92m looking for comments and=20 >> feedbacks about our idea in new IE added in exporting the flow=20 >> information correlated with BGP community. As dear chair told me that=20 >> the mail-list is still alive, I follow the suggestion of putting my=20 >> draft here and searching for advice and suggestions in the right place= . >> >> Before that, I made a short summary of my draft which may be helpful=20 >> in quick looking at the draft. When we consider traffic steering in=20 >> our backbone network, we feel that the flow information based on BGP=20 >> community is quite suitable. That=92s the reason why we write the=20 >> draft. And we now recommend two IEs which may be assigned by IANA:=20 >> bgpSourceCommunityList and bgpDestinationCommunityList. >> >> If you are facing up with this situations as us, then we can discuss=20 >> about the IEs especially the details. >> >> The information of my draft:=20 >> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-li-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-communi= ty-00.txt=20 >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__www.ietf.org_i= nternet-2Ddrafts_draft-2Dli-2Dopsawg-2Dipfix-2Dbgp-2Dcommunity-2D00.txt&d= =3DCwMDEA&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DXx9729xYDYoCgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCoX= NKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed3zfEKAlZ4zaux4&s=3DT9dMbA_3x= k8ZMfCI0dkNONKt1xL04aoMa8vn_-9FBns&e=3D> >> >> I=92m looking forward for your comments. >> >> Best regards and have a nice trip in Berlin. >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Rong Gu >> China Mobile Research Institute >> No.32 Xuanwumen West Street, Xicheng District >> Beijing, China, 100053 >> Mobile: +86 13811520541 >> Phone: +86 10 15801696688 Ext. 36211 >> Email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > IPFIX mailing list > [email protected] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__www.ietf.org_mai= lman_listinfo_ipfix&d=3DCwICAg&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DXx9729xYDYo= CgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed3zfEKAl= Z4zaux4&s=3DmL0br6tuMk78xRPYaHEPxZ5usdrXvvMI1C_g105zdws&e=3D =20 --------------84B4FD6F1AE96AB2BABB0262 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html> <head> <meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252"> </head> <body bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000"> When a draft specifies one of the list types, should it also specify the type of the list elements and the expected semantics?<br> <br> Else we could have non-interoperable implementations exporting the same "IANA standard" information element, where one is a "basicList of X" while another is a "basicList of Y".<br> ie, although the IE is the same, the basicList Field ID and semantics are different. See RFC 6313, Figure 1.)<br> <br> eg, the BGP community draft referenced below creates a new bgpSourceCommunityList. I suppose this may be a list of bgpSourceAsNumber, but that's not specified in the draft - so it could equally be a list of sourceIPv4Address or any other IE.<br> <br> Alternatively, devices could simply export IE #291 (basicList), with the bgpSourceCommunityList and bgpDestinationCommunityList disambiguated by the basicList Field ID contained in the basicList header. However that would be horrendous for collectors...<br> <br> P.<br> <br> <br> <div class=3D"moz-cite-prefix">On 20/07/16 08:12, Benoit Claise wrote= :<br> </div> <blockquote cite=3D"mid:[email protected]" type=3D"cite"> <div class=3D"moz-cite-prefix">Dear all,<br> <br> We know that the <a moz-do-not-send=3D"true" href=3D"https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__tools.ietf= .org_html_rfc7012-23section-2D7&d=3DCwMDEA&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2= jTzg&r=3DXx9729xYDYoCgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR= _pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed3zfEKAlZ4zaux4&s=3DPT25lVmWADTBAoRFJls07fJ6PTOd2= XWc0L4bTWxB3MY&e=3D">IANA considerations</a> mentions "expert review" for the <a moz-do-not-send=3D"true" href=3D"https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__www.iana.o= rg_assignments_ipfix_ipfix.xhtml&d=3DCwMDEA&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi= 2jTzg&r=3DXx9729xYDYoCgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyA= R_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed3zfEKAlZ4zaux4&s=3Dtbt3wdaVgevcKVTqBEKX_MhNO7g_= oaW3XiywAp65WgY&e=3D">IPFIX registry</a>.<br> This BGP community is actually a special IPFIX Information Element as this is the first one based on <a moz-do-not-send=3D"true" href=3D"https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__tools.ietf= .org_html_rfc6313&d=3DCwMDEA&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DX= x9729xYDYoCgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68I= QNaZBed3zfEKAlZ4zaux4&s=3DR9ipRubr7eEQrMnskDLzBjeZqhpnmefnWc59t3_ab7s= &e=3D">RFC 6313=A0 </a>(basicList, subTemplateList, subTemplateMultiList) <br> So it deserves special attention, review, and potential documentation as its own RFC.<br> <br> Regards, Benoit<br> =A0<br> </div> <blockquote cite=3D"mid:[email protected]" type=3D"cite"> <meta name=3D"Generator" content=3D"Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"> <style><!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:"Microsoft YaHei UI"; panose-1:2 11 5 3 2 2 4 2 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} @font-face {font-family:Verdana; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:"\@Microsoft YaHei UI"; panose-1:2 11 5 3 2 2 4 2 2 4;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; text-justify:inter-ideograph; font-size:10.5pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; color:#0563C1; text-decoration:underline;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-priority:99; color:#954F72; text-decoration:underline;} span.EmailStyle17 {mso-style-type:personal-compose; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;} /* Page Definitions */ @page WordSection1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} --></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" /> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit"> <o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" /> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--> <div class=3D"WordSection1"> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Hi, dear all.<o:p><= /o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Nice meeting you in the mail-list of IPFIX. This IETF in Berlin right now, we submit a draft and present it about the IPFIX IE extension when considering BGP community. I=92m looking for comments and feedbacks about our idea in new IE added in exporting the flow information correlated with BGP community. As dear chair told me that the mail-list is still alive, I follow the suggestion of putting my draft here and searching for advice and suggestions in the right place. <o= :p></o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p>=A0</o:p></spa= n></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Before that, I made= a short summary of my draft which may be helpful in quick looking at the draft. When we consider traffic steering in our backbone network, we feel that the flow information based on BGP community is quite suitable. That=92s the reason why we write the draft. And we now recommend two IEs which may be assigned by IANA: bgpSourceCommunityList and bgpDestinationCommunityList. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p>=A0</o:p></spa= n></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">If you are facing u= p with this situations as us, then we can discuss about the IEs especially the details. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p>=A0</o:p></spa= n></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">The information of = my draft: <a moz-do-not-send=3D"true" href=3D"https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__www.ietf.o= rg_internet-2Ddrafts_draft-2Dli-2Dopsawg-2Dipfix-2Dbgp-2Dcommunity-2D00.t= xt&d=3DCwMDEA&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DXx9729xYDYoCgBDd= cp1FKt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed3zfEKAlZ= 4zaux4&s=3DT9dMbA_3xk8ZMfCI0dkNONKt1xL04aoMa8vn_-9FBns&e=3D" target=3D"_blank"><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Microsoft YaHei UI",sans-serif;background:white">https://www= .ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-li-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-00.txt</spa= n></a><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p>=A0</o:p></spa= n></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">I=92m looking forwa= rd for your comments.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Best regards and ha= ve a nice trip in Berlin.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"text-align:left" align=3D"left"= ><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang=3D"EN-US">--------------------------------------------= ---------------<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"text-align:left" align=3D"left"= ><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang=3D"EN-US">Rong Gu<br> China Mobile Research Institute<br> No.32 Xuanwumen West Street, Xicheng District<br> Beijing, China, 100053<br> Mobile: +86 13811520541<br> Phone: +86 10 15801696688 Ext. 36211<br> Email: <a moz-do-not-send=3D"true" href=3D"mailto:[email protected]"><span style=3D"color:blue">[email protected]</span></a><= o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p>=A0</o:p></spa= n></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p>=A0</o:p></spa= n></p> </div> </blockquote> <br> <br> <fieldset class=3D"mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> <br> <pre wrap=3D"">_______________________________________________ IPFIX mailing list <a class=3D"moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">IPFI= [email protected]</a> <a class=3D"moz-txt-link-freetext" href=3D"https://urldefense.proofpoint.= com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_ipfix&d=3DCwIC= Ag&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DXx9729xYDYoCgBDdcp1FKt5PyYd1TCo= XNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed3zfEKAlZ4zaux4&s=3D= mL0br6tuMk78xRPYaHEPxZ5usdrXvvMI1C_g105zdws&e=3D">https://urldefense.= proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_ipfix&a= mp;d=3DCwICAg&c=3DIL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=3DXx9729xYDYoCgBDdcp1F= Kt5PyYd1TCoXNKhyPY8CFp8&m=3DZslthyAR_pCMk0ceVDm68IQNaZBed3zfEKAlZ4zau= x4&s=3DmL0br6tuMk78xRPYaHEPxZ5usdrXvvMI1C_g105zdws&e=3D</a>=20 </pre> </blockquote> <br> </body> </html> --------------84B4FD6F1AE96AB2BABB0262-- --===============7531473546471376163== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPFIX mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix --===============7531473546471376163==--