Re: [IPFIX] Review of draft-irtf-nmrg-location-ipfix-07.txt
PJ Aitken <[email protected]> Fri, 3 Mar 2017 10:42:41 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipfix |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Authors, has this document been reviewed by any IPFIX experts?
I see a request on November 23rd, but no reviews. So let me sign up for
that.
First, I took a quick look at the Figures in Appendix B:
Figure 1: the Field Count should be 5, not 2.
Figure 2: the size of the optional Padding field is wrong: the figure
shows 9 bits rather than 8.
Figure 4: the Length of 32 should be 28. The "geospatialLocationPosLat"
Information Element isn't defined.
Figure 5: the Field Count of 2 should be 3.
Figure 7: The "geospatialLocationPostLng" and "geospatialLocationtLng"
Information Elements aren't defined.
Figure 9: The sizes of the "CivicValue" data fields are not shown
correctly. eg, "Inria Nancy-Grand Est" is depicted in 6 octets when it
should contain 21. Therefore the Figure is misleading and difficult to
understand; it is not a good example. Please redraw the figure
correctly. Please mark the variable-lengths eg "vlen = 21".
Figure 11:
The Set IDs (311, 312, 313) do not correspond to the Template IDs
in Figure 10 (306, 307, 308).
Again, the "Inria Nancy-Grand Grand Est" field is depicted in 6
octets rather than the requisite 27. Without the repeated "Grand", the
21 would be correct. Please write "vlen=21"
The "Civic location Attr length" of 25 seems wrong.
This document is not ready for publication. Please post an updated
version so I can check that all the IPFIX details are correct.
Thanks,
P.
_______________________________________________
IPFIX mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix