Subject: [ippm] Metrics registry discussion.

From: Henk Uijterwaal <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 10:34:58 +0200

IPPM Group,

Please see below.  In Maastricht, we discussed this topic without reaching
a conclusion.  I did promise to take the discussion to the list though.

So, this is call for comments about the registry and it's future.  In
particular, I'd like to hear from people who are using the current registry,
who have developed a registry themselves for a particular application,
or who think that a different registry would be useful for them.

Note that comments made on the list so-far or at the Maastricht meeting
have been noted.  Please respond by October 15, so we can discuss
further steps by the Beijing meeting.

Henk

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: On agenda point #7
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 11:28:49 +0200
From: Henk Uijterwaal <[email-masked]>
Organisation: RIPE NCC
To: IETF IPPM WG <[email-masked]>

IPPM Group,

The Maastricht agenda has this entry:

7. Metrics registry (25)
   = Intro (Henk)
   = draft-morton-ippm-rfc4148-obsolete (Al)
   = draft-stephan-ippm-registry-ext (Emile)
   = Discussion

The background of this is the following: in RFC 4148, a registry for the IPPM
metrics has been introduced. This registry has seen very little use over the
years, mainly because the registry does not allow to store the parameters used
for every metric. That the registry isn't widely used, is best witnessed when
RFC 5644 was published and a typo was introduced in the registry. Any parser
would have detected this syntax error. Yet, it took more than 8 months before
somebody noticed. Also, the author of the original document agrees that the
registry needs to be improved.

The question is how to proceed here.  There are several options:

 a. Withdraw the current registry.  This is proposed in
    draft-morton-ippm-rfc4148-obsolete.

 b. Expand the current registry in order to make it more useful.
    This is proposed in draft-stephan-ippm-registry-ext.

 c. Drop the current registry, start with a new one from scratch.

The plan is to have 2 presentations of the draft (about 5 minutes each),
followed by a discussion.

Comments, both to the list and at the meeting, are welcome,

Henk

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                           Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre          http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku
P.O.Box 10096          Singel 258         Phone: +31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam      1016 AB Amsterdam  Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands        The Netherlands    Mobile: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I confirm today what I denied yesterday.            Anonymous Politician.