Subject: Re: [IPFIX] New AD review of draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-10.txt

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:45:26 +0200

Dear authors,

The draft improved quite dramatically.
Thanks for that.
See in line for some more comments. I removed all unnecessary text.

> Dear authors,
>
> I'm performing the (new) AD review of 
> draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech-10.txt
> Lucky you, an extra pair of eyes specifically looking at your draft
>
> If some points have been discussed already on the mailing list, let me 
> know. I have to admit that I have not been following the latest 
> iterations of this draft.
>
> IMHO, this document needs some more work...
> I don't think that this document is really in line with the other 
> Intermediate Processes documents:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6235
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipfix-a9n-03
> Note that I might have some more comments once all the points in this 
> email are addressed, as there are many ;-)
> However, I'm available for a conf. call to clarify my points if you 
> want to
>
> See in-line.
...
>> 8.2.  Registration of Object Identifier  . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
>>    9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
>>    10. Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
>>    11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
>>      11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
>>      11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
>>    Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
> Don't you have to include the non-normative XML in the appendix, as it 
> was done for RFC5102, RFC5103?
>>
>
>> 2. Terminology
>>
>>    This document is consistent with the terminology introduced in
>>    [RFC5101], [RFC5470], [RFC5475] and [RFC3917].  As in [RFC5101] and
>>    [RFC5476], the first letter of each IPFIX-specific and PSAMP-specific
>>    term is capitalized along with the flow selection specific terms
>>    defined here.
>>
>>    * Packet Classification
>>
>>       Packet Classification is a process by which packets are mapped to
>>       specific Flow Records based on packet properties or external
>>       properties (e.g. interface).  The properties (e.g. header
>>       information, packet content, AS number) make up the Flow Key. In
>>       case a Flow Record for a specific Flow Key already exists the Flow
>>       Record is updated, otherwise a new Flow Record is created.
>
> How is this different that the Metering Process (RFC5101)?
>     Metering Process
>
>        The Metering Process generates Flow Records.  Inputs to the
>        process are packet headers and characteristics observed at an
>        Observation Point, and packet treatment at the Observation Point
>        (for example, the selected output interface).
>
>        The Metering Process consists of a set of functions that includes
>        packet header capturing, timestamping, sampling, classifying, and
>        maintaining Flow Records.
>
>        The maintenance of Flow Records may include creating new records,
>        updating existing ones, computing Flow statistics, deriving
>        further Flow properties, detecting Flow expiration, passing Flow
>        Records to the Exporting Process, and deleting Flow Records.
> What is the connection with the Metering Process?
> Figure 1 seems to suggest that Packet Classification is a subset of 
> the Metering Process...
not sure that one was answered.

>
>
>>
>>    * Packet Aggregation Process
>>
>>       In the IPFIX Metering Process the Packet Aggregation Process
>>       aggregates packet data into flow data and forms the Flow Records.
> How is this different from the Metering Process?
the "Packet Aggregation Process" is not used in the document. Why do we 
need it?

>> After the aggregation step only the aggregated flow information is
>>       available.  Information about individual packets is lost.
>>
>>
>>
> Intermediate Flow Selection Process: an Intermediate Process as in
>        [RFC6183  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6183>] that ...
>
>
The new definition improved a lot:

  * Intermediate Flow Selection Process

       An Intermediate Flow Selection Process takes Flow Records as its
       input and selects a subset of this set as its output.
       Intermediate Flow Selection Process is a more general concept than
       Intermediate Selection Process as defined in [RFC6183  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6183>].  While an
       Intermediate Selection Process selects Flow Records from a
       sequence based upon criteria-evaluated Flow record values and
       passes only those Flow Records that match the criteria, an
       Intermediate Flow Selection Process selects Flow Records using
       selection criteria applicable to a larger set of Flow
       characteristics and information.

But is there a reason why this definition can't be based on 
"intermediate Process" from RFC 6183:

    Intermediate Process

           An Intermediate Process takes a record stream as its input from
           Collecting Processes, Metering Processes, IPFIX File Readers,
           other Intermediate Processes, or other record sources; performs
           some transformations on this stream based upon the content of each
           record, states maintained across multiple records, or other data
           sources; and passes the transformed record stream as its output to
           Exporting Processes, IPFIX File Writers, or other Intermediate
           Processes in order to perform IPFIX Mediation.  Typically, an
           Intermediate Process is hosted by an IPFIX Mediator.
           Alternatively, an Intermediate Process may be hosted by an
           Original Exporter.

So

  * Intermediate Flow Selection Process

      _  An Intermediate Flow Selection Process is__an Intermediate Process as in
       [_RFC6183  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6183>_] that_  takes Flow Records as its
       input and selects a subset of this set as its output.
       Intermediate Flow Selection Process is a more general concept than
       Intermediate Selection Process as defined in [RFC6183  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6183>].  While an
       Intermediate Selection Process selects Flow Records from a
       sequence based upon criteria-evaluated Flow record values and
       passes only those Flow Records that match the criteria, an
       Intermediate Flow Selection Process selects Flow Records using
       selection criteria applicable to a larger set of Flow
       characteristics and information.

Regarding terminology, I still some instances of "observation point". 
Should be "Observation Point"

...

>>
>> 4.  Flow selection as a Function in the IPFIX Architecture
>>
Thanks for your new figure 1.
One editorial change: change the + in the left vertical line.

       +======|========================+      |
       |      |  Mediator              |      |
       +    +-V-------------------+    |      |
       |    | Collecting Process  |    |      |
       +    +---------------------+    |      |
       |    | Intermediate Flow   |    |      |
       |    | Selection Process   |    |      |
       +    +---------------------+    |      |
       |    |  Exporting Process  |    |      |
       +    +-|-------------------+    |      |
       +======|========================+      |

>>
>> 5.1.  Flow Filtering
>>
>>    Flow Filtering is a deterministic function on the IPFIX Flow Record
>>    content.  If the relevant flow characteristics are already observable
>>    at packet level (e.g.  Flow Keys), Flow Filtering can be applied
>>    before aggregation at packet level.  In order to be compliant with
>>    this document, at least the Property Match Filtering MUST be
>>    implemented.
> This contradicts.
>     In order to be compliant with this document, at
>     least one of the flow selection schemes MUST be implemented.
Actually, wrong cut/paste.
This contradicts, in section 1:

    In order to be compliant with this document, at
    least the Property Match Filtering MUST be implemented.

>>
>> 8.  IANA Considerations
>>
>> 8.1.  Registration of Information Elements

Table 3: Information Elements to be registered, you can't put the value 
1, 2, 3,
You need TBD1, TBD2, etc...
And you must add
"IANA Note: please replace TBD1, TBD2, ... with the assigned values, 
throughout the document."

>>
>>
>> 8.2.  Registration of Object Identifier
>>

RFC 5815 is obsoleted by RFC 6615 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6615>

What you want is an extra in 
http://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers, pointing to this RFC:

    Sub-registry Name: IPFIX-SELECTOR-MIB Functions
    Reference: [RFC6615]
    Registration Procedures: Expert Review
    Prefix: iso.org.dod.internet.mgmt.mib-2.ipfixSelectorMIB.ipfixSelectorObjects.ipfixSelectorFunctions
    (1.3.6.1.2.1.194.1.1)

    Decimal Name                  Description                       Reference
    ------- --------------------- --------------------------------- ---------
    1       ipfixFuncSelectAll    Select everything                 [RFC6615]
    2       psampSampCountBased   Systematic Count-based Sampling   [RFC6727]
    3       psampSampTimeBased    Systematic Time-based Sampling    [RFC6727]
    4       psampSampRandOutOfN   Random n-out-of-N Sampling        [RFC6727]
    5       psampSampUniProb      Universal Probabilistic Sampling  [RFC6727]
    6       psampFiltPropMatch    Property Match Filtering          [RFC6727]
    7       psampFiltHash         Hash-based Filtering              [RFC6727]

So you need TBDx

    +---------+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------+
    | Decimal | Name                  | Description         | Reference |
    +---------+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------+
    |  TBDx   | flowSelectorAlgorithm | This Object         | [RFCyyyy] |
    |         |                       | Identifier          |           |
    |         |                       | identifies the Flow |           |
    |         |                       | selection technique |           |
    |         |                       | (e.g., Filtering,   |           |
    |         |                       | Sampling) that is   |           |
    |         |                       | applied by the Flow |           |
    |         |                       | Selection Process   |           |
    +---------+-----------------------+---------------------+-----------+

                Table 4: Object Identifiers to be registered

"IANA Note: please replace TBDx with the assigned value, throughout the 
document."

Btw, there is a mismatch between the IANA registry and the table in 
section 7.1:

    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
    | ID |        Technique         |      Parameters          |
    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
    | 1  | Systematic count-based | flowSamplingInterval     |
    |    | Sampling               | flowSamplingSpacing      |
    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
    | 2  | Systematic time-based  | flowSamplingTimeInterval |
    |    | Sampling               | flowSamplingTimeSpacing  |
    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
    | 3  | Random n-out-of-N      | samplingSize             |
    |    | Sampling               | samplingPopulation       |
    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
    | 4  | Uniform probabilistic  | samplingProbability      |
    |    | Sampling               |                          |
    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
    | 5  | Property Match         | Information Element      |
    |    | Filtering              | Value Range              |
    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
    |   Hash-based Filtering      | hashInitialiserValue     |
    +----+------------------------+ hashFlowDomain           |
    | 6  | using BOB              | hashSelectedRangeMin     |
    +----+------------------------+ hashSelectedRangeMax     |
    | 7  | using IPSX             | hashOutputRangeMin       |
    +----+------------------------+ hashOutputRangeMax       |
    | 8  | using CRC              |                          |
    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+
    | 9  | Flow-state Dependent   | No agreed Parameters     |
    |    | Flow Selection         |                          |
    +----+------------------------+--------------------------+

Also, in this table above, you need "TBDx" instead of 9

- I see "Flow Selection", but this term is not defined.

Thanks.

Regards, Benoit.

---

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:01:01 -0500

Dear draft-ietf-ipfix-flow-selection-tech authors,

I was expecting a quick discussion on the very few remaining issues...
That has not happened.
The draft status is: AD evaluation, Revised ID Needed.

Regards, Benoit

>> If some points have been discussed already on the mailing list, let 
>> me know. I have to admit that I have not been following the latest 
>> Don't you have to include the non-normative XML in the appendix, as 
>> it was done for RFC5102, RFC5103?
>>>
>>
>>> 2. Terminology
>>>
> the "Packet Aggregation Process" is not used in the document. Why do 
> we need it?
>
> Table 3: Information Elements to be registered, you can't put the 
> value 1, 2, 3,
> "IANA Note: please replace TBDx with the assigned value, throughout 
> the document."
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPFIX mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix