Re: Measurement Process -> Metering Process

[Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>]

Dear all,

Do I understand correctly from the meeting minutes (below) that we get rid of the Reporting Process.

Open Issue (not numbered): Terminology Metering Process (IPFIX) vs. 
  Measurement Process(PSAMP)
Terminology problem: When psamp started it wasn't clear that ipfix would be 
chosen for export, the architecture is similar but still different. What IPFIX 
calls "metering" is defined as "measurement" in PSAMP terminology. 
Juergen: Let's use term "metering" for both.  Shall we also drop terms 
  "selection process" and "reporting process"?
Tanja: Keep selection process as part of metering process (is in line with 
  IPFIX, because metering process can contain sampling/filtering).  But 
  selection process should be kept. 
Nick: I agree.
Juergen: The changes need to be applied also to the framework draft and the
  packet selection draft that are currently in AD review.

Without objections, I will be removing the concept of Reporting Process in [PSAMP-PROTO].
Anyway, we don't need it in the protocol.

Regards, Benoit.

Tanja, Nick, and al.

Regarding the "Measurement Process -> Metering Process" issue discussed during the IETF meeting, I understand that:
- the Measurement Process definition disappears
- we replace all instances of Measurement Process by (IPFIX) Metering Process
- we keep the Selection Process

I was not too clear about the following point:
- do we keep the Reporting Process?
   There is actually no information about it (no such thing such as Reporting Process ID)
   This is just a concept, right?

Regards, Benoit.
 

--
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/>