Re: Fwd: [IPFIX] Export of MIB variable in IPFIX: new IETFdraft

  Hi Dan,

Around 20 minutes.

Regards, Benoit.
> Makes sense to me. How much time do you need?
> Regards,
> Dan
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* [email protected]
>     [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Benoit Claise
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, October 19, 2010 5:11 PM
>     *To:* [email protected]
>     *Subject:* [OPS-AREA] Fwd: [IPFIX] Export of MIB variable in
>     IPFIX: new IETFdraft
>
>     Ron and Dan,
>
>     Since this draft concerns a (kind of) consolidation between two
>     data models within OPS, it might make sense to also present this
>     work in the OPS-AREA meeting. What do you think?
>
>     Regards, Benoit.
>
>
>     -------- Original Message --------
>     Subject: 	[IPFIX] Export of MIB variable in IPFIX: new IETF draft
>     Date: 	Tue, 19 Oct 2010 16:52:40 +0200
>     From: 	Benoit Claise <[email protected]>
>     To: 	[email protected] <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>     Dear all,
>
>     Andrew, Paul, and I posted this new draft, "Exporting MIB variables
>     using the IPFIX Protocol".
>     http://www.ietf.org/staging/draft-johnson-ipfix-mib-variable-export-00.txt
>
>             Abstract
>
>                This document specifies a way to export Management
>                Information Base (MIB) objects within the IPFIX protocol,
>                avoiding the need to define new IPFIX Information Elements
>                for existing Management Information Base objects that are
>                already fully specified.
>
>                This method requires an extension to the current IPFIX
>                protocol.  New Template Set and Options Template Sets are
>                specified to allow the export of Simple Network Management
>                Protocol (SNMP) MIB Objects.
>
>
>     The problem we want to solve is that we keep development two data models
>     for a unique information model (*) , i.e. MIB and IPFIX information
>     elements, which are overlapping. For example: there is an IPFIX
>     information element representing the ifName MIB Object. Note that some
>     more advantages are specified in the draft.
>     (*) RFC 3444, "On the Difference between Information Models and Data Models"
>
>     Please read it and send your feedback.
>
>     I would like to have a slot at the next meeting to present this work.
>
>     Regards, Benoit.
>     _______________________________________________
>     IPFIX mailing list
>     [email protected]
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix
>

_______________________________________________
OPS-AREA mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-area