some doubts

["Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student)" <saq66@umkc.edu>]

Hi all,
   I find the draft lacks some valid details .I have listed some for your feeback

1.The darft also doesnt talk about the transport negotiation which is very important for remote packet sampling .

2.The implementation of data collector part seems to work out more for hardware vendors.But will that not be costly ?Is there any existing such hardware implementations ? I personally feel implementation by software can be much more flexible (cost also decreases)

3.The draft defines a remote export packet sampling .what sort of function will be employed to export remote PSAMP data.Will the existing IPFIX exporter be used ?

4.Cant the exporter configuration be considered out of the scope ?.My assumption is that exporter configuration can be done by MIB (even CLI).Also,the configuration details will make the architechture complex.Avoiding exporter configuration details will support the KISS concept.

5.Is network survillance also a intended application ?


6.I presume explicit mentioning of MPLS FEC's  in unnessary.MPLS and ITE WG does that work and are standartizing the characterization.The group can focus on IP flows .


I have a doubt on what exactly is the difference between source-based aggregation and packet-based sampling.This will exactly give me an idea on what essentially is the difference between the working of PSAMP and IPFIX groups.
 
Meet you all in tuesday's PSAMP BOF
Thanks in advance,
-Senthil.




--
to unsubscribe send a message to psamp-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/psamp/>