Spatial Composition of Metrics
RFC 6049
Revision differences
Document history
| Date | Rev. | By | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2015-10-14
|
16 | (System) | Notify list changed from ippm-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition@ietf.org to (None) |
|
2012-08-22
|
16 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Stewart Bryant |
|
2012-08-22
|
16 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Dan Romascanu |
|
2012-08-22
|
16 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Ronald Bonica |
|
2011-01-04
|
16 | Cindy Morgan | State changed to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue. |
|
2011-01-04
|
16 | Cindy Morgan | [Note]: changed to 'RFC 6049' |
|
2011-01-04
|
16 | (System) | RFC published |
|
2010-09-10
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor |
|
2010-09-10
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress |
|
2010-09-10
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors |
|
2010-09-08
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress |
|
2010-09-08
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors |
|
2010-09-07
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress |
|
2010-09-07
|
16 | Amy Vezza | State changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
|
2010-09-03
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
|
2010-09-03
|
16 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
|
2010-09-03
|
16 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
|
2010-09-03
|
16 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
|
2010-09-02
|
16 | Lars Eggert | State changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-09-02
|
16 | Stewart Bryant | [Ballot discuss] The term Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream[i] is very confusing. Similarly the term Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream metric is confusing. I think that the authors are trying to use the … [Ballot discuss] The term Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream[i] is very confusing. Similarly the term Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream metric is confusing. I think that the authors are trying to use the same text to describe both metrics, but it is not clear that they are not presenting a math expression. The term FiniteDelay is not defined in this doc and I could nor see it in RFC2679 Similarly I do not see definitions for MeanDelay or CompMeanDelay or MinDelay* In each case they seem to be an intermediate variable, but I can't find text explaining why this is done. * - there is a definition of MinDelay in a much later section, but it's not clear that this is a general definition, nor is there a forward reference to it. ======== I cannot parse the ASCII maths that is used to calculate Type-P-Composite-One-way-pdv-refmin-quantile-a |
|
2010-09-02
|
16 | Stewart Bryant | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Stewart Bryant has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Stewart Bryant |
|
2010-09-02
|
16 | Ron Bonica | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Ron Bonica has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Ron Bonica |
|
2010-09-01
|
16 | Amy Vezza | State changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by Amy Vezza |
|
2010-08-26
|
16 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Dan Romascanu has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Dan Romascanu |
|
2010-08-18
|
16 | Amanda Baber | Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the following assignments in the "IANA-IPPM-METRICS-REGISTRY-MIB" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianaippmmetricsregistry-mib ietfFiniteOneWayDelayStream OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Stream" REFERENCE … Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the following assignments in the "IANA-IPPM-METRICS-REGISTRY-MIB" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianaippmmetricsregistry-mib ietfFiniteOneWayDelayStream OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Stream" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 4.1." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfFiniteOneWayDelayMean OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Mean" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 4.2." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfCompositeOneWayDelayMean OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-Composite-One-way-Delay-Mean" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 4.2.5." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfFiniteOneWayDelayMinimum OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Minimum" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 4.3.2." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfCompositeOneWayDelayMinimum OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-Composite-One-way-Delay-Minimum" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 4.3." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfOneWayPktLossEmpiricProb OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-Packet-Loss-Empirical-Probability" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 5.1.4" -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfCompositeOneWayPktLossEmpiricProb OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Composite-One-way-Packet-Loss-Empirical-Probability" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 5.1." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfOneWayPdvRefminStream OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Stream" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 6.1." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfOneWayPdvRefminMean OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Mean" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 6.1.4." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfOneWayPdvRefminVariance OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Variance" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 6.1.4." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfOneWayPdvRefminSkewness OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Skewness" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 6.1.4." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfCompositeOneWayPdvRefminQtil OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Composite-One-way-pdv-refmin-quantile-a" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 6.1.5.1." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn ietfCompositeOneWayPdvRefminNPA OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-Composite-pdv-refmin-NPA" REFERENCE "Reference "RFCyyyy, section 6.1.5.2." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { ianaIppmMetrics nn } -- IANA assigns nn |
|
2010-08-17
|
16 | Amy Vezza | Last call sent |
|
2010-08-17
|
16 | Amy Vezza | State changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza |
|
2010-08-17
|
16 | Lars Eggert | Needs a second last call to call out the downrefs. |
|
2010-08-17
|
16 | Lars Eggert | Last Call was requested by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-08-17
|
16 | Lars Eggert | State changed to Last Call Requested from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-08-14
|
16 | (System) | Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed |
|
2010-08-14
|
16 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-16.txt |
|
2010-08-13
|
16 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2010-08-12 |
|
2010-08-12
|
16 | Cindy Morgan | State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation by Cindy Morgan |
|
2010-08-12
|
16 | Tim Polk | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Tim Polk |
|
2010-08-11
|
16 | Sean Turner | [Ballot comment] I almost made this a discuss, but thought better of it: Should the must in the following be MUST? Passive measurement must restrict … [Ballot comment] I almost made this a discuss, but thought better of it: Should the must in the following be MUST? Passive measurement must restrict attention to the headers of interest. You later mention precautions MUST be taken to keep user information safe and confidential. Seems like the above would fall in to the same kind of MUST? |
|
2010-08-11
|
16 | Sean Turner | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Sean Turner |
|
2010-08-11
|
16 | Robert Sparks | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Robert Sparks |
|
2010-08-11
|
16 | Jari Arkko | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko |
|
2010-08-11
|
16 | Adrian Farrel | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Adrian Farrel |
|
2010-08-11
|
16 | David Harrington | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by David Harrington |
|
2010-08-10
|
16 | Peter Saint-Andre | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Peter Saint-Andre |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Ron Bonica | [Ballot discuss] Nits: == Unused Reference: 'RFC5644' is defined on line 1246, but no explicit reference was found in the … |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Ron Bonica | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Ron Bonica |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Stewart Bryant | [Ballot comment] I found this draft very difficult to read. In part this is the authors terse style and in part this is because of … [Ballot comment] I found this draft very difficult to read. In part this is the authors terse style and in part this is because of the constraints placed on the authors by the use of ASCII text to express mathematical concepts. In respect of the latter we may wish to encourage the authors to submit a a pdf version of this document using standard math notation. ============ Type-P-Finite--Composite-One-way-Delay-Minimum, looks like a typo "--" ========== The term "ground truth" is used, but I could not see a definition or a reference. Google seems to indicate that it is a technical term in sensing, thus a reference or definition would be useful to the reader. ======== A reference should be provided for the derivation of the measurement of Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Skewness |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Stewart Bryant | [Ballot discuss] The term Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream[i] is very confusing. Similarly the term Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream metric is confusing. I think that the authors are trying to use the … [Ballot discuss] The term Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream[i] is very confusing. Similarly the term Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream metric is confusing. I think that the authors are trying to use the same text to describe both metrics, but it is not clear that they are not presenting a math expression. The term FiniteDelay is not defined in this doc and I could nor see it in RFC2679 Similarly I do not see definitions for MeanDelay or CompMeanDelay or MinDelay* In each case they seem to be an intermediate variable, but I can't find text explaining why this is done. * - there is a definition of MinDelay in a much later section, but it's not clear that this is a general definition, nor is there a forward reference to it. ======== I cannot parse the ASCII maths that is used to calculate Type-P-Composite-One-way-pdv-refmin-quantile-a |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Stewart Bryant | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Stewart Bryant |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot comment] The OPS-DIR review by Benoit Claise made a number of useful editorial comments which I suggest to be considered. |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Dan Romascanu | |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Dan Romascanu | |
|
2010-08-09
|
16 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu |
|
2010-08-04
|
16 | Gonzalo Camarillo | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Gonzalo Camarillo |
|
2010-07-30
|
16 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Steve Hanna. |
|
2010-07-20
|
16 | Lars Eggert | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Lars Eggert |
|
2010-07-20
|
16 | Lars Eggert | Ballot has been issued by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-07-20
|
16 | Lars Eggert | Created "Approve" ballot |
|
2010-07-20
|
16 | Lars Eggert | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2010-08-12 by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-07-20
|
16 | Lars Eggert | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-07-20
|
16 | (System) | State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system |
|
2010-07-14
|
16 | Amanda Baber | IANA questions/comments: - in Section 4.1 you specify the Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream metric but you do not register it anywhere. Should you register this metric? - in … IANA questions/comments: - in Section 4.1 you specify the Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Poisson/Periodic-Stream metric but you do not register it anywhere. Should you register this metric? - in Section 6.1 you specify the Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Poisson/Periodic-Stream metric but you do not register it anywhere. Should you register this metric? The Following registrations do not match the document. Either the document defines the metric in a different place, or the document does not define the metric at all (except, sometimes, as a formula): - you register the Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Stream metric and specify section 5.1, but this metric is not defined in section 5.1. - you register the Type-P-Finite-Composite-One-way-Delay-Mean metric and specify section 5.2.5, but this metric is defined in section 4.2. - you register the Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Minimum metric and specify section 5.3.2, but this metric is not defined in section 5.3.2 - you register the Type-P-Finite-Composite-One-way-Delay-Minimum metric and specify section 5.3.5, but this metric is defined in section 4.3. - you register the Type-P-One-way-Packet-Loss-Empirical-Probability metric and specify section 6.1.4, but this metric is defined in section 5.1.4. - you register the Type-P-Composite-One-way-Packet-Loss-Empirical-Probability metric and specify section 6.1.5, but this metric is defined in section 5.1. - you register the Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Stream metric and specify section 7.1, but this metric is not defined in section 7.1. - you register the Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Mean metric and specify section 7.1.4, but this metric is not defined in section 7.1.4. - you register the Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Variance metric and specify section 7.1.4, but this metric is not defined in section 7.1.4. - you register the Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Skewness metric and specify section 7.1.4, but this metric is not defined in section 7.1.4. - you register the Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-quantile-a metric and specify section 7.1.5.1, but this metric is not defined in section 7.1.5.1. - you register the Type-P-One-way-Composite-pdv-refmin-NPA metric and specify section 7.1.5.2, but this metric is not defined in section 7.1.5.2. Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following assignments in the "IANA-IPPM-METRICS-REGISTRY-MIB" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianaippmmetricsregistry-mib ietfFiniteOneWayDelayStream OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Stream" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 5.1." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfFiniteOneWayDelayMean OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Mean" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 5.2." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfCompositeOneWayDelayMean OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-Composite-One-way-Delay-Mean" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 5.2.5." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfFiniteOneWayDelayMinimum OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-One-way-Delay-Minimum" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 5.3.2." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfCompositeOneWayDelayMinimum OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Finite-Composite-One-way-Delay-Minimum" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 5.3.5." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfOneWayPktLossEmpiricProb OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-Packet-Loss-Empirical-Probability" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 6.1.4." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfCompositeOneWayPktLossEmpiricProb OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Composite-One-way-Packet-Loss-Empirical-Probability" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 6.1.5." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfOneWayPdvRefminStream OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Stream" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 7.1." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfOneWayPdvRefminMean OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Mean" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 7.1.4." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfOneWayPdvRefminVariance OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Variance" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 7.1.4." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfOneWayPdvRefminSkewness OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-pdv-refmin-Skewness" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 7.1.4." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfCompositeOneWayPdvRefminQtil OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-Composite-One-way-pdv-refmin-quantile-a" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 7.1.5.1." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } ietfCompositeOneWayPdvRefminNPA OBJECT-IDENTITY STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Type-P-One-way-Composite-pdv-refmin-NPA" REFERENCE "Reference "RFC-ippm-spatial-composition-15, section 7.1.5.2." ::= { ianaIppmMetrics TBD } We understand the above to be the only IANA Action for this document. |
|
2010-07-11
|
16 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Steve Hanna |
|
2010-07-11
|
16 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Steve Hanna |
|
2010-07-06
|
16 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza |
|
2010-07-03
|
16 | Lars Eggert | Last Call was requested by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-07-03
|
16 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
|
2010-07-03
|
16 | (System) | Last call text was added |
|
2010-07-03
|
16 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
|
2010-07-03
|
16 | Lars Eggert | State Changes to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation::AD Followup by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-07-02
|
15 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-15.txt |
|
2010-07-01
|
14 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-14.txt |
|
2010-07-01
|
16 | Lars Eggert | State Changes to AD Evaluation::AD Followup from AD Evaluation by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-07-01
|
16 | Lars Eggert | The IPPM registry needs to be obsoleted before this can be progressed. |
|
2010-06-30
|
16 | Lars Eggert | State Change Notice email list have been change to ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition@tools.ietf.org from ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org |
|
2010-06-30
|
16 | Lars Eggert | State Changes to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-06-30
|
16 | Lars Eggert | [Note]: 'Henk Uijterwaal (henk@ripe.net) is the document shepherd.' added by Lars Eggert |
|
2010-06-28
|
16 | Cindy Morgan | State Changes to Publication Requested from AD is watching by Cindy Morgan |
|
2010-06-28
|
16 | Cindy Morgan | (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the document and, in particular, does he … (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the document and, in particular, does he or she believe this version is ready for forwarding to the IESG for publication? Document sheperd is Henk Uijterwaal. The second question is too stupid to answer. (1.b) Has the document had adequate review both from key WG members and from key non-WG members? Yes, please see the list in section 1 and 10. (1.c) Does the Document Shepherd have concerns that the document needs more review from a particular or broader perspective, No. (1.d) Does the Document Shepherd have any specific concerns or issues with this document that the Responsible Area Director and/or the IESG should be aware of? There is one practical issues, see section 9. The problem is that we defined a registry for our metrics but that it has seen almost no use at all. This makes it hard to ask people to continue to maintain it. There are suggestions to improve the registry to something that is useful, but these have to go through the entire WG process. I don't think we should wait for that with this document, but rather just publish it and fix things if/when there is consensus on a new registry format. And if the group decides to abandon the regisitry, then no time is wasted here either. (1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? A group of 10 people has reviewed the document. (1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? No (1.g) Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the document satisfies all ID nits? There is one nit remaining. A down-reference to a framework document (published as informative). Framework docs are published as informative, but if they don't define terms and concepts in this document in a normative way, then what purpose do they serve? The other nits found by the tool seem to be a problem of the tool. (1.h) Has the document split its references into normative and informative? Are there normative references to documents that are not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? Yes, no (1.i) Has the Document Shepherd verified that the document IANA consideration section exists and is consistent with the body of the document? Yes. (1.j) Has the Document Shepherd verified that sections of the document that are written in a formal language, such as XML code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc., validate correctly in an automated checker? N/A (1.k) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document Announcement Write-Up? Recent examples can be found in the "Action" announcements for approved documents. The approval announcement contains the following sections: Technical Summary This memo utilizes IP Performance Metrics that are applicable to both complete paths and sub-paths, and defines relationships to compose a complete path metric from the sub-path metrics with some accuracy w.r.t. the actual metrics. This is called Spatial Composition in RFC 2330. The memo refers to the Framework for Metric Composition, and provides background and motivation for combining metrics to derive others. The descriptions of several composed metrics and statistics follow. Working Group Summary The normal WG process was followed and the document has been discussed for several years. The document as it is now, reflects WG consensus, with nothing special worth noticing. Document Quality Good |
|
2010-06-28
|
16 | Cindy Morgan | Intended Status has been changed to Proposed Standard from None |
|
2010-06-28
|
16 | Cindy Morgan | [Note]: 'Henk Uijterwaal (henk@ripe.net) is the document shepherd.' added by Cindy Morgan |
|
2010-06-25
|
13 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-13.txt |
|
2010-05-31
|
12 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-12.txt |
|
2010-04-14
|
11 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-11.txt |
|
2009-10-19
|
10 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-10.txt |
|
2009-06-25
|
16 | Cindy Morgan | State Changes to AD is watching from Dead by Cindy Morgan |
|
2009-06-23
|
09 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-09.txt |
|
2009-03-07
|
08 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-08.txt |
|
2009-01-14
|
16 | (System) | State Changes to Dead from AD is watching by system |
|
2009-01-14
|
16 | (System) | Document has expired |
|
2008-07-13
|
07 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-07.txt |
|
2008-02-25
|
06 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-06.txt |
|
2007-11-05
|
05 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-05.txt |
|
2007-07-08
|
04 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-04.txt |
|
2007-03-20
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-03.txt |
|
2006-10-24
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-02.txt |
|
2006-06-28
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-01.txt |
|
2006-06-12
|
16 | Lars Eggert | Draft Added by Lars Eggert in state AD is watching |
|
2006-02-28
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ippm-spatial-composition-00.txt |