Subject: [ipfix-arch] RE: Drafts and conference

From: [email-masked]
Date: 28 Jan 2002 12:29:53 -0800

Folks,

I am scheduling the meeting for 11:00am PST on Thursday.  I will get the conference info out and an agenda when I get the confirmation.

This meeting is not where we will discuss the in-depth technical aspects of the documents, but more defining the documents and making assignments so we can move onward.

If you have any suggestions on the agenda or comments, send them to me and I will put them on the agenda that will go out.  

If there are any problems, let me know.  Please let me know who is going to participate so I can have enough lines.

K.C.

On Mon, 28 January 2002, [email-masked] wrote:

> 
> Hello KC,
> 
> since you agreed to prepare  the agenda please take the following items in the agenda.
> 
> 
> (1) Table of content for Architecture document
> (2) Table of Content for Data Model
> (3) Identify the work items and prepare initial table of content
> (4) Commitment from individual to contribute to relevant sections
> 
> 
> We should not waste too much time on discussing the technical topics - teleconferencing is not the place.
>  
> We should get commitment from individuals and they should circulate to the mailist for comments.
> Finally one person should able to compile the document.
>  
> 
> As u mentioned in your email that you are planning to host the conference - i do not have any problem in hosting the conference, let me know incase if you want me to do so
> 
>  
>  
> Regards
> Ramg

--
Help        mailto:[email-masked] and say "help" in message body
Unsubscribe mailto:[email-masked] and say
"unsubscribe ipfix" in message body
Archive     http://ipfix.doit.wisc.edu/archive/

---

From: Dave Plonka <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 15:52:45 -0600

On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 12:29:53PM -0800, [email-masked] wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> I am scheduling the meeting for 11:00am PST on Thursday.
> I will get the conference info out and an agenda when I get the confirmation.

Thanks KC!

> This meeting is not where we will discuss the in-depth technical
> aspects of the documents, but more defining the documents and making
> assignments so we can move onward.
> 
> If you have any suggestions on the agenda or comments, send them to me
> and I will put them on the agenda that will go out.
> 
> If there are any problems, let me know.  Please let me know who is
> going to participate so I can have enough lines.

I'll participate in the call.  We'll save Nevil the cost of the call
from NZ ;^).

It'd be great to have a volunteer on the call for each group ("arch"
and "data") to serve as a scribe and prepare notes/minutes during the
call.  Let us know you're doing so at the beginning of the call and you
can send the notes to me afterward if you'd prefer that I summarize
them for the public mailing list.

KC - one bit for the agenda - I'm wondering if the "arch" and "data"
authors might have requirements of the "requirements" document.  Please
think about what changes, if any, you need to ask of the requirements
authors so that you have a suitable foundation (terminology or
whatever) for your document.

Dave

-- 
[email-masked]  http://net.doit.wisc.edu/~plonka  ARS:N9HZF  Madison, WI

---

From: Dave Plonka <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 15:23:06 -0600

IPFIX folks,

Below, please find the minutes that I prepared following a conference
call that was arranged to organize the IPFIX Internet Draft efforts.

Thanks to KC Norseth and Enterasys for hosting the conference call.
A list of those that participated follows the minutes below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The call began Thu Jan 31 ~1300 CST 2002.

The conference call roughly followed an agenda prepared by KC Norseth.

During the discussion various people volunteered to be responsible for
contributing info on particular topics.  Their names are noted below
in context.

These topics were discussed:

*) Why are three proposed draft documents laid out this way?
   * IPFIX Requirements
   * IPFIX Architecture
        it was noted that protocol doesn't belong in Architecture
   * IPFIX Data Model

   Specifically, the question was asked why not a protocol document.
   (We discussed that we're not chartered to design a protocol, but
   to concentrate on standardizing existing practice.)

   There is some confusion about what items belong in the Architecture
   rather than Data model and vice versa.

*) We discussed points suggested for the Architecture draft...
   The first was "Summary of Operation":

   It was noted that some things about the flow definition (such as
   what causes a flow to be instantiated, and what temporal
   characteristics they have) are important to specifying the IPFIX
   architecture.

*) It was noted that the components or entities (and possibly interfaces
   between) are a key portion of the Architecture document.

   Capabilities negotiation was also mentioned for the Architecture.
   Kevin Zhang volunteered to work on this.

   It was mentioned that a work-in-progress Internet Draft document
   by Benoit and Ganesh does a good job of laying this out.

   It was also mentioned that the Architecture doc should lay out
   a number of architecture/component "scenarios".

   It was discussed as to whether or not the Requirements document
   should specify the flow definition.  There was not support voiced
   for making it more specific.

   There were other kudos for Benoit's & Ganesh's document for its
   description of the flow "concept".

*) Message formats

   It was noted that "messages formats" mostly belongs in a protocol
   specification so may be out of scope.  However, it was noted that
   the items of information would be necessary for the Architecture
   specification.

   Some folks referred to this as the "information model".
   KC Norseth, Paul Calato, and Simon Leinen volunteered to work
   on specifying this information.

   It was noted that the handshaking or interfaces between components
   does belong in the Architecture.

   It was considered whether or not the "information model" belongs in
   architecture or data model.  It was suggested that perhaps it would
   be best to focus on enumerating the important topics, and fit them
   into the documents afterward.  This idea was supported by others as
   well.

   Kevin Zhan, Ram Gopal, Man Li, and +Benoit Claise volunteered to
   work on the Architecture.

   Juergen Quittek volunteered to work work on Terminology.

*) It was mentioned it was hoped that Benoit's & Ganesh's document
   might serve as a strawman, or starting point for the next WG
   document.

   The question was raised as to what would be best to do immediately
   with that document.  It was suggested that it be submitted as an
   individual draft, and it will be considered as a template or as
   input to working group documents, like other individual drafts that
   have been prepared by other IPFIX participants.

*) KC Norseth volunteered to work on Error Detection / Handling, and
   data recovery.

   Other issues were raised as possibilities for needed to be addressed
   in some fashion by the Architecture document.  These include NAT,
   firewalls and middleboxes.

   Reinaldo Penno volunteered to work on the NAT/firewall, and midcom
   issues/interactions.

*) KC Norseth volunteered to serve as document editor.

*) The point was raised that the upcoming IPFIX document(s) should address
   or mention interactions with other IETF-specified topics such as
   AAA, and Intrusion Detection.

   Tanja Zseby volunteered some information about AAA and configuration for
   flow export.

*) It was noted that the I-D draft deadline is soon for the documents
   as listed in our WG milestones.  The submission deadlin is Feb. 22
   for IETF 53.

   As such, thee was support for setting a deadling of Friday, Feb. 8,
   2002 for those that volunteer info (above) to submit it to the
   editor, preferably via the IPFIX mailing list <[email-masked]>.

*) It was suggested that, until we collect the information from those
   volunteers and whether it fits into Architecture and Data Model
   documents, perhaps we should refer to it as a (single) "design"
   document for the time being.

We signed off from the call at Thu Jan 31 ~1400 CST 2002.

The following (at least) joined the conference call:

   George Carle
   Tanja Zseby
   Paul Calato
   Dave Plonka
   Kevin Zhang
   KC Norseth
   Bill Richards
   Will Eatherton
   Benoit Claise
   Ganesh Sadasivan
   Vamsi Valluri
   Ram Gopal
   Jc Martin
   Carter Bullard
   Juergen Quittek
   Reinaldo Penno
   Nevil Brownlee
   Simon Leinen

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Any errors are mine, but please follow-up to the mailing list if you
have substantive corrections.

Respectfully,
Dave