Export of Structured Data in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
RFC 6313

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.

(Dan Romascanu) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Stewart Bryant) No Objection

Comment (2011-04-12 for -)
No email
send info
A well written document.

The following are minor nits that I noticed during my review

In Section 2
"However, the amount of information has become so important..." 
I think you mean "....so large...."

2.4. The Proposal

This is a standards track doc - therefore this is no longer a proposal.

(Gonzalo Camarillo) No Objection

(Ralph Droms) No Objection

(Wesley Eddy) No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

Comment (2011-04-13 for -)
No email
send info
With the additional rfc editor note added to the security considerations this is fine.

(Russ Housley) No Objection

Comment (2011-04-13 for -)
No email
send info
  The Gen-ART Review by Suresh Krishnan on 12-Apr-2011 shows two places
  where the document is not clear.  Please address these two places.

  Section 2 says:

    However, the amount of information
    has become so important that, when dealing with highly granular
    information such as Flow information, a push mechanism (as opposed
    to a pull mechanism, such as SNMP) is the only solution for
    routers whose primary function is to route packets.

  Did you mean that "the amount of information is so large" or did you
  mean that "collecting this information has become so important" or
  did you mean something else?

  Section 2 also says:

    Furthermore, in order to reduce the export bandwidth requirements,
    the network elements have to integrate mediation functions to
    aggregate the collected information, both in space and time.
  What does aggregation based on space mean?

(Pete Resnick) No Objection

(Peter Saint-Andre) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) No Objection

(Sean Turner) No Objection