Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ipfix-mediation-protocol-07

Request Review of draft-ietf-ipfix-mediation-protocol
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2013-10-25
Requested 2013-10-18
Authors Benoît Claise, Atsushi Kobayashi, Brian Trammell
Draft last updated 2013-10-28
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -07 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -08 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -07 by Stephen Kent (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -07 by Jürgen Schönwälder (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Meral Shirazipour 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-ipfix-mediation-protocol-07-genart-lc-shirazipour-2013-10-28
Reviewed rev. 07 (document currently at 10)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2013-10-28


I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at



Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.


Document: draft-ietf-ipfix-mediation-protocol-07

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour

Review Date: 2013-10-25

IETF LC End Date: 2013-10-25

IESG Telechat date: NA





This draft is almost ready to be published as Standard RFC but I do have some comments.



Major issues:



Minor issues:




Nits/editorial comments:


-[Page 3], Section 1, 

"The specifications in the IPFIX protocol

   [RFC7011] have not been defined in the context of an IPFIX Mediator

   receiving, aggregating, correlating, anonymizing, etc... Flow Records

   from one or more Exporters.


not clear after the "etc...".   Maybe it should be "etc., Flow Records from one or more Exporters." ?



-[Page 3], Section 1, 

"An overview of the technical problem is covered in section

   6 of [RFC5982]: loss of original Exporter information, loss of base

   time information, transport sessions management, loss of Options

   Template Information, Template Id management, considerations for

   network considerations for aggregation.



Last part of the sentence uses "considerations" twice. Please revise for better clarity.

Also in html format, "section 6 of [RFC5982]" points to section 6 of the draft and not the RFC.


-[Page 8], Section 3, Figure 1:

Caption should say "IPFIX Message Header Format"


-[Page 12], "Figure 3 shows the Template Mapping for the system shown in Figure 2."

Where is Figure 3? Is the text above Figure 3 caption on page 13 considered to be the figure? If so it is a bit confusing.

This comment applies to other figures as well. Suggestion, use ascii art to draw boxes around the text.

General comment about figures: some of them span across pages, it would be good to revise those.


-[Page 18], just before Section 5.1, it would be good to introduce sections 5.1 and 5.2.

-[Page 19], just before Section 6.1, it would be good to introduce it.

-[Page 23], just before Section 10.3, it would be good to introduce sections 10.3 and 10.4.





Best Regards,



Meral Shirazipour

Ericsson Research