Re: draft-ietf-tewg-measure-05.txt comments
"Dr. Richard W. Tibbs" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.tewg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Jim, Jerry, etal: Your comments are indeed helpful. I have agreed with Wai to try a new version of our draft, based on the feedback we have had in the last couple of weeks. It will take me a while to do what is proposed -- which is significant "thinning" and re-organizing of the document -- in your comments, but I am willing. As I do this, I may need to clarify some of your comments and I will mail the list to do so. Yours, Dr. Richard W. Tibbs Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS wrote: >Jim, > >Your detailed comments and suggestions are very helpful, and should help improve the quality of the document. > >I have some comments below on Tom's and your comments. > >Thanks, >Jerry > >Jim> Flow measurement is a deep-hole, we should either defer to other >Jim> standardization efforts on this, or we need to be a lot more >Jim> concrete on what we need to know here. > >Tom> Defer to the IPFX WG that is tackling this problem right now. > >Let's be more concrete in the TEM draft re flow measurement requirements. I don't see a lot on TE measurement requirements in the IPFIX charter or requirements document http://ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipfix-reqs-09.txt. Let's be sure all the requirements get stated. > >Jim> " Need for higher order statistics... " push it to the offline hosts >Jim> "Need for packet-sampled..." "Need for offline bulk file >Jim> transfer..." The need needs to be better justified or removed. > >Tom> I asked to have the offline stuff added. For the >Tom> collection of a traffic matrix, as you know, this >Tom> entails the collection of a lot of data especially on >Tom> big core routers. It is preferable to use offline >Tom> bulk file transfer mechanisms such as NetFlow (being >Tom> standardized in IPFX now) or offline SNMP file transfers >Tom> of statistics snapshots. This reduces the overhead of >Tom> the box having to service network management requests, >Tom> and also reduces the amount of network mgmt overhead >Tom> required to fetch the same amount of data if you >Tom> collect your data as one big batch at some longer periodic >Tom> interval. > >Quite unclear that moving massive amounts of data for offline processing is always 'preferable' to online statistics to meet all requirements. Data collection/summarization in the 'big core routers', e.g., on a node-pair basis, is very desirable for traffic matrix derivation in some applications. >