Evaluation of Candidate Protocols for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
draft-leinen-ipfix-eval-contrib-03
Yes
(Bert Wijnen)
No Objection
(David Kessens)
(Margaret Cullen)
(Scott Hollenbeck)
(Ted Hardie)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.
Bert Wijnen Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Allison Mankin Former IESG member
(was Discuss, No Objection)
No Objection
No Objection
(2004-04-02)
Unknown
I like the idea of the candidates being published as RFCs - they should all have text at the beginning stating they were candidates to make the context clear.
David Kessens Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Margaret Cullen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2004-03-30)
Unknown
Please change "IPSEC" to "IPsec" throughout the document.
Scott Hollenbeck Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Steven Bellovin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2004-04-09)
Unknown
Nice evaluation. I would like it if all of the candidates were described in RFCs -- a future reader of this document may be frustrated by the inability to research some details of one of the described candidates. The discussion of LFAP should probably note that DES is not regarded as adequately secure. The Conclusions section should note that the work effort to improve NetFlow must include suitable security enhancements. In particular, some decision on the precise security mechanism must be made; simply saying "just use IPsec" or "just switch to TCP and use TLS" are inadequate, especially the former.
Ted Hardie Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown