RE: some doubts

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

Dr.Nick,
Look for more doubts inline and at the end.

> 1.The darft also doesnt talk about the transport negotiation which is very important for remote packet sampling .
>I'm not sure that transport needs to be negotiated as part of the
>protocol. A more lightweight approach is to have transport parameters 
>in a MIB that can be configured using SNMP. This is attractive because 
>there's already lots of experience with SNMP, it's reliable and allows
>authentication, and it's easy to create lightweight SNMP clients on a
>collector.

reliability ok...but when it comes to transport..congestion & sequence etc comes
into picture right ? ..So there should be a better way than this approach.


> 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 .
> Disagree. Knowing the FEC can have useful diagnostic value. Also,
>remember
>that we don't propose that PSAMP report flows (in the IPFIX sense), just 
>packet level information.
You did not get my question.MPLS can be considered as layer 2 or layer 3.
My view is always *MPLS as a link layer*.If we are interested in lower 
layer details in the packet level may be MAC addresses,VC for frame relay..
then consider MPLS ..Treat MPLS as one of the many types of packets than 
explicitly mentioning them.The explicit mentioning will be more relevant when
it is considered in a coarse granular (i.e flow) sense.

I have some more clarifications .

1.The draft says *Each sampler will be individually configurable to sample packets
   with a certain probability p.  Examples are probabilistic sampling,
   in which each packet is selected quasirandomly with probability p,
   and deterministic sampling, in which packets are sampled
   periodically with period 1/p. *
I view the above contention as uniform sampling(correct me if i am wrong).
We are aware that heavy tailed packtes are prevalent in today's 
traffic.Hence,will the uniform sampling answer these packets ?.

2.what will be the exact reaction of collector and exporter in times of overload ?

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/>