Write-up for:
draft-ietf-ipfix-mib-variable-export-09
Exporting MIB Variables using the IPFIX Protocol
=== 1. Summary ===
Document shepherd: Nevil Brownlee
Responsible Area Director: Joel Jaeggli
This document specifies a way to complement IPFIX Data Records with
Management Information Base (MIB) objects, avoiding the need to define
new IPFIX Information Elements for existing Management Information
Base objects that are already fully specified.
An IPFIX Options Template and method are specified, which are used to
export the extra information required to fully describe Simple Network
Management Protocol (SNMP) MIB objects in IPFIX.
=== 2. Review and Consensus ===
This draft was presented at IETF 85 in Atlanta, at that time
it seemed the WG were near consensus. However, the draft's use
of the IPFIX mechanisms seemed clumsy; the authors agreed to
re-work it to use Extended Specifier Fields (EFS) instead.
A revised version using EFS was presented at IETF 86, but it
was clear that EFS was a significant extension to IPFIX. Paul
Aitken - its lead author - agreed to re-work it again.
The current version (-09) requires two new Options Templates
and several new IPFIX Information Elements to describe SNMP
objects properly; the IE Doctors are curently considering those.
However, it does not need any extensions to the IPFIX protocol.
Since the IPFIX WG closed down after IETF 88 there has been
no discussion of the draft; at least that means that there have
been no objections to it! Once the current IE Doctors discussion
of it is complete, I believe we'll have something approaching
consensus.
=== 3. Intellectual Property ===
This draft has Cisco IPR, i.e. "If technology in this document is
included in a standard adopted by IETF and any claims of any Cisco
patents are necessary for practicing the standard, any party will
have the right to use any such patent claims under reasonable,
non-discriminatory terms, with reciprocity, to implement and fully
comply with the standard."
=== 4. Other Points ===
This document has no downward references.
Its IANA Considerations clearly state what IANA is being asked
to do, i.e. add some new IPFIX Information Elements to the
IPFIX Information Element Registry. Note that one author
is one of the IE-Doctors.
The ID-nits checker has no complaints.
Overall, I believe that this draft is ready for publication as
an RFC.
==============================