Subject: Re: [IPFIX] comments on draft-johnson-ipfix-mib-variable-export-01

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 10:38:53 +0200

Hi,

Can we please avoid using PDF for comments on the mail list? While using
PDF may be justified in some cases in order to better represent complex
diagrams in RFCs or Internet-Drafts (although even for RFCs and
Internet-Drafts the default format is ASCII text, and PDF or Post-Script
are accepted only if an equivalent ASCII version is also available), I
see no reason to require proprietary sofware in order to be able to read
comments or other mails on an IETF list. 

Thanks and Regards,

Dan

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Chris Inacio
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 5:52 PM
To: IPFIX Working Group
Subject: [IPFIX] comments on draft-johnson-ipfix-mib-variable-export-01

Here are my comments on the draft.  This model is much improved and with
some minor additional clarification I think it should be much more
seriously considered.  I did everything as PDF comments to the PDF
version of the draft.  I've attached it here.

regards,
chris

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:10:49 +0200

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:52:19AM -0400, Chris Inacio wrote:

> Here are my comments on the draft.  This model is much improved and
> with some minor additional clarification I think it should be much
> more seriously considered.  I did everything as PDF comments to the
> PDF version of the draft.  I've attached it here.

Inacio,

thanks for your comments. While going through them, we were not sure
what you meant with your common on Figure 1:

  Maybe a little too implementation specific. This could all be
  represented in DTMF CIM format with a translation to SNMP/MIB.

Can you please elaborate? My view is that "Instrumentation" is really
meant as being implementation specific and the figure does not rule
out that your instrumentation is in fact a DMTF CIM store as long as
it provides MIB object instrumentation consistent with definitions in
MIB modules.

Perhaps you can propose concrete edits to make it easier for us to
understand what you think should be changed?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>