Re: PROTO-19: The timestamp should be reported to microsecond resolution

[Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>]

Juergen,
> Paul and Benoit,
>
> I see no problem with creating "flow-independent" time stamps.
Done in [PSAMP-INFO] and used in [PSAMP-PROTO]

Regards, Benoit.
> However, I would also be fine with the other alternative
> of using the flow start elements.
>
> Thanks,
>
>    Juergen
>
> --On 3/2/06 11:22 PM +0000 Paul Aitken wrote:
>
> > Benoit,
> >
> > > can we reuse the flowStartMicroSeconds Information Element?
> > > Or (if you are a purist), the "flow" prefix is confusing in a PSAMP
> > > implementation?
> > > Please provide your feedback.
> >
> >  From the purist perspective, I would prefer to create the new 
> > timestamp elements you list. They're more appropriate than 
> > flowStart... and may be of use in other ways in future.
> >
> > > If the latter, then we must define a new Information Element for the
> > > microsecond precision. And, while doing that, we should define the
> > > other precision at the same time: second, millisecond, and nanosecond.
> >
> > Agreed.
> >
> > --
> > Paul Aitken
> > Cisco Systems Ltd, Edinburgh, Scotland.
> >
> > --
> > 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/>


--
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/>