Re: Open Issue 6: Associations ID -> Selection Path

[Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>]

Ok, I made the modifications for the new draft that I will be posting soon.

Regards, Benoit.
> Hi Benoit,
>
> I also prefer Selection Path.
>
> Kind regards,
> Tanja
>
> Benoit Claise wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The PSAMP open issue 6 is the following:
> >
> >    Even if the notion of Associations ID is mentioned in [PSAMP-TECH],
> >    maybe a term such as SelectionPath or PathID would be more 
> > appropriate.
> >
> > The background of this issue is the following.
> > [PSAMP-TECH] specifies the Associations ID like this:
> >
> >    ASSOCIATIONS        Values: <STREAM ID, IPFIX Metering process ID, 
> > IPFIX Exporting    process ID, IDs of other associated processes>    
> > With STREAM ID: Observation point ID AND List of SELECTOR_IDs
> > However, we concluded during the last IETF meeting that we don't need 
> > the IPFIX Metering and Exporting Process ID.
> > So we're left with:
> >
> >    Values: <Observation point ID, List of SELECTOR_IDs>
> >
> > Since we don't associate anymore the observation point with 
> > processes, it was proposed to change the name:
> > from "Associations ID" to "Selection Path" or "Path ID".
> >
> > Personally, I prefer the Selection Path term, along with the 
> > selectionPath I.E.
> > For the simple reason that we speak of selection methods all over in 
> > the PSAMP drafts.
> >
> > Feedback?
> >
> > 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/>