From bclaise@cisco.com Fri Oct 4 00:06:35 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3063921F8984; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 00:06:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.528 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.071, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HylQaR+-0VKv; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 00:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A02A21F89A5; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 00:06:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5872; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1380870381; x=1382079981; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zDyiVjLRO/kEnVVATaz5d04sKItouSWOpckBq9n8izY=; b=jwp6N5fqwCa5ojN26xyh8L+4nxXhkMs5JoZ3aq/dy6Xqy4jF+L6cKU6h fte69PNRZngUigx7pQ8/8dWCngRvi2mitENY4+/ctPhvzbrdSvj4dN0bu hMC7qFuDH9W5BAFnPG3NUF1TI5+xsdAIhyFwjduuJ9St8t+kR084jJXY0 c=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgUFAC9oTlKQ/khN/2dsb2JhbABRCYMHOMIagRcWdIImAQEEODAQESwWDwkDAgECAQ8sCgYBDAYCAQGHcAMPDLI6DYlrjGaBKYFJhCMDlhiBaYEvhQaGFIU2gWaBQDo X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,1031,1371081600"; d="scan'208";a="160327471" Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Oct 2013 07:06:17 +0000 Received: from [10.60.67.85] (ams-bclaise-8914.cisco.com [10.60.67.85]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9476C4W024402; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 07:06:14 GMT Message-ID: <524E68E4.6060105@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 09:06:12 +0200 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "aaa-doctors@ietf.org" , "MIB Doctors (E-mail)" , YANG Doctors , "ops-dir@ietf.org" , "pm-dir@ietf.org" , IETF DNS Directorate References: <20131003222226.30291.40486.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20131003222226.30291.40486.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20131003222226.30291.40486.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [pm-dir] Fwd: [IESG-AGENDA-DIST] Summarized Agenda for the 2013-10-10 IESG Teleconference X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 07:06:35 -0000 Dear all, Please find below the agenda of the Oct 10th IESG telechat. Please send your questions, comments and concerns before Oct 9th COB. Thanks and Regards, Benoit. INTERNET ENGINEERING STEERING GROUP (IESG) Summarized Agenda for the 2013-10-10 IESG Teleconference This agenda was generated at 2013-10-03 15:19:35 PDT Up-to-date web version of this agenda can be found at: http://datatracker.ietf.org/iesg/agenda/ 2. Protocol Actions 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Items o draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-sam-09 - IETF stream Internet Small Computer Systems Interface (iSCSI) SCSI Features Update (Proposed Standard) Note: David Black (david.black@emc.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Martin Stiemerling IANA Review: IANA OK - Actions Needed Consensus: Yes o draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-11 - IETF stream An Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Request History Information (Proposed Standard) Note: Paul Kyzivat (pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu) is the document shepherd. Token: Richard Barnes IANA Review: IANA - Review Needed Consensus: Unknown o draft-ietf-ecrit-psap-callback-12 - IETF stream Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) Callback (Proposed Standard) Token: Richard Barnes IANA Review: IANA OK - Actions Needed Consensus: Unknown o draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines-14 - IETF stream Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options (Best Current Practice) Token: Ted Lemon IANA Review: IANA OK - No Actions Needed Consensus: Yes o draft-ietf-idr-rfd-usable-03 - IETF stream Making Route Flap Damping Usable (Proposed Standard) Token: Stewart Bryant IANA Review: IANA OK - No Actions Needed Consensus: Yes o draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit-04 - IETF stream Transmission and Processing of IPv6 Extension Headers (Proposed Standard) Token: Brian Haberman IANA Review: IANA OK - Actions Needed Consensus: Yes 2.1.2 Returning Items NONE 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Items o draft-yusef-dispatch-ccmp-indication-06 - IETF stream Conference Focus Indicating CCMP Support (Proposed Standard) Token: Gonzalo Camarillo IANA Review: IANA OK - Actions Needed Consensus: Yes o draft-resnick-retire-std1-01 - IETF stream Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document (Best Current Practice) Token: Jari Arkko IANA Review: IANA OK - No Actions Needed Consensus: Yes 2.2.2 Returning Items NONE 2.3 Status Changes 2.3.1 New Items NONE 2.3.2 Returning Items NONE 3. Document Actions 3.1 WG Submissions 3.1.1 New Items o draft-ietf-hip-reload-instance-09 - IETF stream Host Identity Protocol-Based Overlay Networking Environment (HIP BONE) Instance Specification for REsource LOcation And Discovery (RELOAD) (Experimental) Token: Ted Lemon IANA Review: IANA OK - Actions Needed Consensus: Yes o draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-vpls-interop-05 - IETF stream VPLS Interoperability with Provider Backbone Bridges (Informational) Token: Stewart Bryant IANA Review: IANA OK - No Actions Needed Consensus: Unknown o draft-ietf-intarea-flow-label-balancing-01 - IETF stream Using the IPv6 Flow Label for Server Load Balancing (Informational) Token: Ted Lemon IANA Review: IANA OK - No Actions Needed Consensus: Yes o draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-callflows-06 - IETF stream Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) History-Info Header Call Flow Examples (Informational) Token: Richard Barnes IANA Review: IANA OK - No Actions Needed Consensus: Unknown 3.1.2 Returning Items NONE 3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD 3.2.1 New Items o draft-worley-service-example-14 - IETF stream Session Initiation Protocol Service Example -- Music on Hold (Informational) Note: Rifaat Shekh-Yusef (rifaat.sy@gmail.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Richard Barnes IANA Review: Version Changed - Review Needed Consensus: Unknown 3.2.2 Returning Items NONE 3.3 Status Changes 3.3.1 New Items NONE 3.3.2 Returning Items NONE 3.4 IRTF and Independent Submission Stream Documents 3.4.1 New Items o conflict-review-hausenblas-csv-fragment-00 IETF conflict review for draft-hausenblas-csv-fragment draft-hausenblas-csv-fragment-05 URI Fragment Identifiers for the text/csv Media Type (ISE: Informational) Token: Barry Leiba o conflict-review-vandesompel-memento-00 IETF conflict review for draft-vandesompel-memento draft-vandesompel-memento-10 HTTP framework for time-based access to resource states -- Memento (ISE: Informational) Token: Barry Leiba 3.4.2 Returning Items NONE 3.4.3 For Action o conflict-review-hoffine-already-dotless-00 IETF conflict review for draft-hoffine-already-dotless draft-hoffine-already-dotless-04 Top-Level Domains that Are Already Dotless (ISE: Informational) Token: Joel Jaeggli 4. Working Group Actions 4.1 WG Creation 4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review o Source Packet Routing in Networking (spring) 4.1.2 Proposed for Approval o IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained Nodes (6lo) o Extensions for Scalable DNS Service Discovery (dnssd) 4.2 WG Rechartering 4.2.1 Under Evaluation for IETF Review NONE 4.2.2 Proposed for Approval o MBONE Deployment (mboned) o INtermediary-safe SIP session ID (insipid) From bclaise@cisco.com Sun Oct 6 14:06:39 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 370071F0ED1 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 14:06:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.542 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aq0aK3gGakWj for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 14:06:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5921F0ED7 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 14:06:31 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r96L6USG021117 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 23:06:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (sweet-brew-5.cisco.com [144.254.10.206]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r96L6Ck4012952 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 23:06:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from bclaise@localhost) by sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id r96L69aV028105 for pm-dir@ietf.org; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 23:06:09 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 23:06:09 +0200 From: Benoit Claise To: pm-dir@ietf.org Message-ID: <20131006210609.GA28103@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2013 21:06:39 -0000 Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a normative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric". Regards, Benoit =========================================================== Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-03 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-03 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-00Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-00 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-00 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-03 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-07 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-09 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active From bclaise@cisco.com Sun Oct 13 14:06:36 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F68F21E8130 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2013 14:06:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.577 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.577 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.022, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZMd1oU9+5msP for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2013 14:06:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B9B21F9473 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2013 14:06:29 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9DL6SBD021800 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2013 23:06:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (sweet-brew-5.cisco.com [144.254.10.206]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9DL6CGT003254 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2013 23:06:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from bclaise@localhost) by sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id r9DL689l012333 for pm-dir@ietf.org; Sun, 13 Oct 2013 23:06:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 23:06:08 +0200 From: Benoit Claise To: pm-dir@ietf.org Message-ID: <20131013210608.GA12331@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 21:06:36 -0000 Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a normative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric". Regards, Benoit =========================================================== Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-03 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-03 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-00Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-00 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-00 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-03 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-00 Active draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-07 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-09 Active draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active From bclaise@cisco.com Sun Oct 20 14:06:34 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B09E211E828F for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 14:06:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.579 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pUiVSvQSLRcE for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 14:06:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A4911E8244 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 14:06:28 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9KL6RLi021593 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 23:06:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (sweet-brew-5.cisco.com [144.254.10.206]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9KL6BY4007072 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 23:06:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from bclaise@localhost) by sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id r9KL69T5009613 for pm-dir@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 23:06:09 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 23:06:09 +0200 From: Benoit Claise To: pm-dir@ietf.org Message-ID: <20131020210609.GA9611@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 21:06:34 -0000 Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a normative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric". Regards, Benoit =========================================================== Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-00Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-00 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-00 Active draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-07 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-09 Active draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active From bclaise@cisco.com Wed Oct 23 06:14:38 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B711E11E8257 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 06:14:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.524 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cjA3z22GdmaE for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 06:14:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9685D11E8279 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 06:14:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5681; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1382534073; x=1383743673; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=jUxQ7AXbNYyrf0eapA4N11QWnYcp4FeNqQCp3isVsMQ=; b=WutScBbduAUhJKZJlEiwZkfp1cojtPLiSrHI05xDIefsQ3Rg4LwdUrUF JRJMZE5cE4N2rlCx5Y/OM0KYyc5DsNcmeWtPqmAZ6RzshFlqSoKZyN7Im 7crE/MK+5xFfFE0AFSqGVU5Fd8G/sL7lrDskiae9ko5QmZHGr0VKIPuey Q=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgUFALTKZ1KQ/khM/2dsb2JhbABZgwc4g36FXbVFgSkWdIIlAQEBBCNUAQEMBBwDAQIKDAoLAgIJAwIBAgEPLAIIBg0BBQIBAQWHawMPDagviGQNiWuMYIJdEQcGAwGCYIFAA5YegWuBL4UMhhWFN4FmgUA6gTWBNA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,554,1378857600"; d="scan'208,217";a="160942162" Received: from ams-core-3.cisco.com ([144.254.72.76]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Oct 2013 13:14:32 +0000 Received: from [10.60.67.89] (ams-bclaise-8918.cisco.com [10.60.67.89]) by ams-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9NDESAX031234; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 13:14:29 GMT Message-ID: <5267CBB4.3090205@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 15:14:28 +0200 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Clark References: <20131001062241.4916.5026.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20131001062241.4916.5026.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20131001062241.4916.5026.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080709090508020802010600" Cc: "pm-dir@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org Subject: [pm-dir] Fwd: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 13:14:38 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080709090508020802010600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alan, Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new version of the draft. My DISCUSS is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ballot/#benoit-claise I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into account. On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric description. Regards, Benoit -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 From: To: , , , , A new version (-07) has been submitted for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ Diff from previous version: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. IETF Secretariat. . --------------080709090508020802010600 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alan,

Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new version of the draft.
My DISCUSS is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ballot/#benoit-claise
I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into account.
On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric description.

Regards, Benoit


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
To: <xrblock-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, <draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics@tools.ietf.org>, <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>, <bclaise@cisco.com>, <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> 


A new version (-07) has been submitted for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt

Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed


The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/

Diff from previous version:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

IETF Secretariat.

.


--------------080709090508020802010600-- From bclaise@cisco.com Wed Oct 23 07:04:56 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 824DF11E8393 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:04:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.073, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fSnlsfgjZ5j2 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:04:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27C9111E83A5 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:04:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=12720; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1382537062; x=1383746662; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=mYdiaV4aBmCKLUN9qyerYbVrnXK1ImuKEjwYwmrg+4Q=; b=Kg89a/BBqZGYu1a1s6gEcjjop4Xd25+vIQP0SKtkb9jkuD+evLrLdak1 54RiRQp9fg9+Z9JFV4f7xVpZXhy32mYOz0r1fEPo9pUv4oZQNUylTRPhE G/9sTsjpPnfarB9JFxu1aRfon8FaofsbdXfSWNmnHdUXGhD0du7YzGA2I Q=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhgFAKXWZ1KQ/khL/2dsb2JhbABZgkNEOIlbtUWBKRZ0giUBAQEEdwEBDAQLEQMBAgEJDAoPCQMCAQIBDy4IBg0BBQIBAQWHawMPDbE/DYlrjGCBJYE4EQcGAwGEIAOBU5RLgWuBL4UMhhWFN4FmgUA6gTWBNA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,554,1378857600"; d="scan'208,217";a="160944397" Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Oct 2013 14:04:20 +0000 Received: from [10.60.67.89] (ams-bclaise-8918.cisco.com [10.60.67.89]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9NE4Fem030390; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:04:16 GMT Message-ID: <5267D75F.4050104@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 16:04:15 +0200 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Varun Singh References: <20131001062241.4916.5026.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5267CBB4.3090205@cisco.com> <4E70A883-0829-44FF-807E-B547AE96439F@comnet.tkk.fi> In-Reply-To: <4E70A883-0829-44FF-807E-B547AE96439F@comnet.tkk.fi> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040809060207070804090703" Cc: "pm-dir@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org, Alan Clark Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:04:56 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040809060207070804090703 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Varun, I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important. Regards, Benoit > Hi Benoit, > > Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below: > > In > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07 > I can add RTP in the following way in > a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric > * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over the > period covered by this report. > OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's comment > from his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) > suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: >> Other than a normative reference to “discard” the definition of this >> block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as it refers to a >> sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611. > > Which of the above option would be preferred? > > In > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00 > updated template will be: > a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric > * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric > * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes discarded over the > period covered by this report. > > Cheers, > Varun > > On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: > >> Hi Alan, >> >> Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new version of the >> draft. >> My DISCUSS is at >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ballot/#benoit-claise >> I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into account. >> On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not specific >> enough. For example the metric name doesn't even mention it's >> specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric description. >> >> Regards, Benoit >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: New Version Notification - >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt >> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 >> From: >> To: , >> , >> , , >> >> >> >> >> A new version (-07) has been submitted for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt >> >> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed >> >> >> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ >> >> Diff from previous version: >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07 >> >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission >> until the htmlized version and diff are available attools.ietf.org . >> >> IETF Secretariat. >> >> . >> >> >> > --------------040809060207070804090703 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi Varun,

I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important.

Regards, Benoit
Hi Benoit,

Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below:

I can add RTP in the following way in 
 a.  Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric
  * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over the
      	   period covered by this report.
OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's comment from his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013)
suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below:
Other than a normative reference to “discard” the definition of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as it refers to a sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611.

Which of the above option would be preferred?

 a.  RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric
       *  Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric
       *  Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes discarded over the
          period covered by this report.

Cheers,
Varun

On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote:

Hi Alan,

Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new version of the draft.
My DISCUSS is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ballot/#benoit-claise
I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into account.
On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric description.

Regards, Benoit


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
To: <xrblock-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, <draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics@tools.ietf.org>, <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>, <bclaise@cisco.com>, <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> 


A new version (-07) has been submitted for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt

Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed


The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/

Diff from previous version:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

IETF Secretariat.

.




--------------040809060207070804090703-- From varun@comnet.tkk.fi Wed Oct 23 06:46:07 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7947D11E8395 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 06:46:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pxta9TbeDYoW for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 06:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-out-02.aalto.fi (smtp-out-02.aalto.fi [130.233.228.121]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A95DE11E838C for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 06:45:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-out-02.aalto.fi (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Email Security Appliance) with SMTP id 644ED2710C9_267D310B; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 13:45:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.netlab.hut.fi (luuri.netlab.hut.fi [130.233.154.177]) by smtp-out-02.aalto.fi (Sophos Email Appliance) with ESMTP id 0EF0627109A_267D310F; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 13:45:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.netlab.hut.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE2E01E10B; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 16:45:51 +0300 (EEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at luuri.netlab.hut.fi Received: from smtp.netlab.hut.fi ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (luuri.netlab.hut.fi [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id hRnNn4KA+Dfm; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 16:45:46 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [172.20.10.2] (37-219-200-18.nat.bb.dnainternet.fi [37.219.200.18]) by smtp.netlab.hut.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3FBF41E133; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 16:45:41 +0300 (EEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B6E374DC-B59C-4FD8-B971-9B4D4695D8CA"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 From: Varun Singh In-Reply-To: <5267CBB4.3090205@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 16:45:35 +0300 Message-Id: <4E70A883-0829-44FF-807E-B547AE96439F@comnet.tkk.fi> References: <20131001062241.4916.5026.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5267CBB4.3090205@cisco.com> To: Benoit Claise X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:08:05 -0700 Cc: "pm-dir@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org, Alan Clark Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 13:46:07 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_B6E374DC-B59C-4FD8-B971-9B4D4695D8CA Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BEE4472E-5E14-469F-9D1B-E45614B6230D" --Apple-Mail=_BEE4472E-5E14-469F-9D1B-E45614B6230D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Hi Benoit, Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below: In = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-= 07 I can add RTP in the following way in=20 a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets = discarded over the period covered by this report. OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's comment from = his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: > Other than a normative reference to =93discard=94 the definition of = this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as it refers to a = sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611. Which of the above option would be preferred? In = https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-met= ric-00 updated template will be: a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes = discarded over the period covered by this report. Cheers, Varun On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: > Hi Alan, >=20 > Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new version of the = draft. > My DISCUSS is at = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-me= trics/ballot/#benoit-claise > I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into account. > On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not specific = enough. For example the metric name doesn't even mention it's specific = to RTP. Same thing for the metric description. >=20 > Regards, Benoit >=20 >=20 > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: New Version Notification - = draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 > From: > To: , = , = , , = >=20 > A new version (-07) has been submitted for = draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: > = http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle= -metrics-07.txt >=20 > Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed >=20 >=20 > The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: > = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-me= trics/ >=20 > Diff from previous version: > = http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-= metrics-07 >=20 > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of = submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >=20 > IETF Secretariat. >=20 > . >=20 >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_BEE4472E-5E14-469F-9D1B-E45614B6230D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Hi = Benoit,

Thanks for the review and catching the error, = comments below:

I can add RTP in the following way = in 
 a.  Run-length =
encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric
=   = * Metric Description: Instances of = RTP packets discarded over the
      	   period covered by this =
report.
OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template = altogether, Alan's comment from his original PM-DIr review email (July = 2013)
suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it = below:
Other than a normative reference to =93discard=94 the definition = of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as it refers = to a sufficiently detailed definition in = RFC3611.

Which of = the above option would be = preferred?

 a.  RTP Payload =
Bytes Discarded Metric
       *  Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric
       *  Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes =
discarded over the
          period covered by this =
report.

Cheers,
Varun
<= br>
On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote:

=20 =20
Hi Alan,

Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new version of the draft.
My DISCUSS is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draf= t-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ballot/#benoit-claise
I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into = account.
On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric description.

Regards, Benoit


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org><= /a>
To: = <xrblock-chairs@tools.iet= f.org>, <draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics@tools.ietf.org><= /a>, <gonzalo.camarillo@erics= son.com>, <bclaise@cisco.com>, <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmai= l.com> 


A new version (-07) has been submitted for =
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xr=
block-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt

Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed


The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-x=
r-discard-rle-metrics/

Diff from previous version:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-xrblock-=
rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of =
submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

IETF Secretariat.

.



= --Apple-Mail=_BEE4472E-5E14-469F-9D1B-E45614B6230D-- --Apple-Mail=_B6E374DC-B59C-4FD8-B971-9B4D4695D8CA Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.p7s Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name=smime.p7s Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIMfjCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICAR4wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDE1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDE1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAxIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMcJg8zOLdgasSmkLhOrlr6KMoOMpohBllVHrdRvEg/q6r8jR+EK 75xCGhR8ToREoqe7zM9/UnC6TS2y9UKTpT1v7RSMzR0t6ndl0TWBuUr/UXBhPk+Kmy7bI4yW4urC +y7P3/1/X7U8ocb8VpH/Clt+4iq7nirMcNh6qJR+xjOhV+VHzQMALuGYn5KZmc1NbJQYclsGkDxD z2UbFqE2+6vIZoL+jb9x4Pa5gNf1TwSDkOkikZB1xtB4ZqtXThaABSONdfmv/Z1pua3FYxnCFmdr /+N2JLKutIxMYqQOJebr/f/h5t95m4JgrM3Y/w7YX9d7YAL9jvN4SydHsU6n65cCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRTcu2SnODaywFc fH6WNU7y1LhRgjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBAAqDCH14qywG XLhjjF6uHLkjd02hcdh9hrw+VUsv+q1eeQWB21jWj3kJ96AUlPCoEGZ/ynJNScWy6QMVQjbbMXlt UfO4n4bGGdKo3awPWp61tjAFgraLJgDk+DsSvUD6EowjMTNx25GQgyYJ5RPIzKKR9tQW8gGK+2+R HxkUCTbYFnL6kl8Ch507rUdPPipJ9CgJFws3kDS3gOS5WFMxcjO5DwKfKSETEPrHh7p5shuuNktv sv6hxHTLhiMKX893gxdT3XLS9OKmCv87vkINQcNEcIIoFWbP9HORz9v3vQwR4e3ksLc2JZOAFK+s sS5XMEoznzpihEP0PLc4dCBYjbvSD7kxgDwZ+Aj8Q9PkbvE9sIPP7ON0fz095HdThKjiVJe6vofq +n6b1NBc8XdrQvBmunwxD5nvtTW4vtN6VY7mUCmxsCieuoBJ9OlqmsVWQvifIYf40dJPZkk9YgGT zWLpXDSfLSplbY2LL9C9U0ptvjcDjefLTvqSFc7tw1sEhF0n/qpA2r0GpvkLRDmcSwVyPvmjFBGq Up/pNy8ZuPGQmHwFi2/14+xeSUDG2bwnsYJQG2EdJCB6luQ57GEnTA/yKZSTKI8dDQa8Sd3zfXb1 9mOgSF0bBdXbuKhEpuP9wirslFe6fQ1t5j5R0xi72MZ8ikMu1RQZKCyDbMwazlHiMIIGQjCCBSqg AwIBAgIDB5rPMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRD b20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYG A1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0EwHhcN MTMwOTE5MDA0NzM4WhcNMTQwOTE5MTY1OTUzWjBdMRkwFwYDVQQNExBaNE5WNEZCUXA3bHhzaUk3 MRwwGgYDVQQDDBN2YXJ1bkBjb21uZXQudGtrLmZpMSIwIAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhN2YXJ1bkBjb21u ZXQudGtrLmZpMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAlSUMPU/8sSgO+ak+ZOnP 2TGZTLkLlXJIW1A8VJmgZufjc6d26UsgM8tjC150lFhhoziLA4fG4OTniC1oMtBdXS5RdoQ8qUNq n/rFkWRjiJeY+LYAbtVsEE7U8Sh6EwKgF89RemFkWALkybsT/+wjLa8XozH3FtDlAzZUJvZUxg2r xZxhqBIZ8WNdg1nxT2+SL0r6O9zaAs19WlhF9rg+2xIxMSizrmJD9mDEZBB9BBLOqmKxvZfhLIuW 92VaBw9lRQweM+n0CzQu3IkcLFUaIOaKX6BMcAaWOVlCSAzmT4UwulzvWNBpNEekGHvoBpDsImh+ YZYrDxNQlt9UwKExHQIDAQABo4IC2TCCAtUwCQYDVR0TBAIwADALBgNVHQ8EBAMCBLAwHQYDVR0l BBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQvza5wrE5+jCPPnK9mIV0HdTrRNTAf BgNVHSMEGDAWgBRTcu2SnODaywFcfH6WNU7y1LhRgjAeBgNVHREEFzAVgRN2YXJ1bkBjb21uZXQu dGtrLmZpMIIBTAYDVR0gBIIBQzCCAT8wggE7BgsrBgEEAYG1NwECAzCCASowLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEW Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwgfcGCCsGAQUFBwICMIHqMCcWIFN0 YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MAMCAQEagb5UaGlzIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIHdh cyBpc3N1ZWQgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIHRoZSBDbGFzcyAxIFZhbGlkYXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRz IG9mIHRoZSBTdGFydENvbSBDQSBwb2xpY3ksIHJlbGlhbmNlIG9ubHkgZm9yIHRoZSBpbnRlbmRl ZCBwdXJwb3NlIGluIGNvbXBsaWFuY2Ugb2YgdGhlIHJlbHlpbmcgcGFydHkgb2JsaWdhdGlvbnMu MDYGA1UdHwQvMC0wK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NydHUxLWNybC5jcmww gY4GCCsGAQUFBwEBBIGBMH8wOQYIKwYBBQUHMAGGLWh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9z dWIvY2xhc3MxL2NsaWVudC9jYTBCBggrBgEFBQcwAoY2aHR0cDovL2FpYS5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20v Y2VydHMvc3ViLmNsYXNzMS5jbGllbnQuY2EuY3J0MCMGA1UdEgQcMBqGGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3Rh cnRzc2wuY29tLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAr3gDC5douOybn8cf4VT7lzXO4GlDTQAbsSeX n6qDYs179aAd6gLuWd7CFRSzH7rD+JgOuWorEjTWIQzh5WFxjS0Q5SPxqGVmqMBh24IGlrIKCrIj fP93/qAHyb4cdtCCwSPFjPF4JDsMoAS2+0XXnzdc/ZhpcgmxnWJ7bEfQVagnbCstIH6RRWzWBUMf WjblvA3VvqJaFkOZ4BAodatluDAsRI13rDrVX3cp269tQ2qb6mMHtIAuzMmRbT5cz4E4tvZPGKHo NH2bdUS+h91pTPWqc44HJgPNoWLgxjByHViLdgSg3pqCGoh7zsnGDmhlk99fYjke1xLViC52Wz7G NDGCA28wggNrAgEBMIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEr MCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3Rh cnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAweazzAJBgUrDgMC GgUAoIIBrzAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0xMzEwMjMx MzQ1MzZaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBT9vYvo6O10DuGqikLABbD9mGWlWTCBpQYJKwYBBAGCNxAE MYGXMIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMi U2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xh c3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAweazzCBpwYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsx gZeggZQwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJT ZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFz cyAxIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQIDB5rPMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIB ADHCfsauv8sl9F8J6OBA8MVoJ9A1n2RF3pPUWTMfbYoGXxgaidG+mosCf+fhX8oCRledCXsQXnCo 6biRHWrU6iuc8IA6/lBMW3QaIb1kW+B0aFlBe/hUfaw5QZ57sr2z5vm3Js9NBLiWAjSBnTM3iu4N KDIfLu2JaP+F86R4ZSipHge/q7oJVbuBcosaME1oKA6bW2omLG2ttJGyn+veaoL8PDIFfL7YyVDn jer99ZmjRrwIK0+v3Mfnx1Mw0lyJTvba2GNV7ncA2RqearNRfkYzjTYefwQqjKTZhxzq7rVAfknz 7a1MZoKt1IgQc4gskj+V96marzZaPCAKzrsCIK8AAAAAAAA= --Apple-Mail=_B6E374DC-B59C-4FD8-B971-9B4D4695D8CA-- From alan.d.clark@telchemy.com Wed Oct 23 07:18:02 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5874411E818A for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:18:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M7ZK4QNPA-Xh for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:17:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omx.cbeyond.com (omx.cbeyond.com [50.20.30.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D71E411E8417 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:17:49 -0700 (PDT) X-SBRS: None X-HAT: Sender Group ONNET_RELAY, Policy $ACCEPTED applied. X-Hostname: omx08bay.sys.cbeyond.net X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkcCADrZZ1JFD9PB/2dsb2JhbAANTIJDfE62DIhGIYEegxkBAQEDAT06AgwGAQgNAQMDAQIBFRIoJQkIAQEEAQ0FCYdrAwkLAwWnaYlXDYlrjGCBJYEeGg0EBwYDAYQgA4FThzSNFgGDGoUzhW6HHYFagVWBNA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,554,1378872000"; d="scan'208,217";a="41956728" Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.125]) ([69.15.211.193]) by omx.cbeyond.com with ESMTP/TLS/DES-CBC3-SHA; 23 Oct 2013 10:17:40 -0400 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.32.0.111121 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 10:17:30 -0400 From: Alan Clark To: Benoit Claise , Varun Singh Message-ID: Thread-Topic: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt Thread-Index: Ac7P+puff/H2rAgGgkO3YtiSOXfArQ== In-Reply-To: <5267D75F.4050104@cisco.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3465368260_526690" Cc: "pm-dir@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:18:02 -0000 > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3465368260_526690 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Hi Benoit My comments related to RFC 6390 compliance for drafts have largely been tha= t RFC 6390 must be applied if the draft defines a metric but does not necessarily need to be applied if the draft simply reports a metric that is defined elsewhere. The objective should be to make sure that there is a single RFC 6390 compliant definition of a metric - sometimes having multipl= e definitions of the same thing can lead to divergent descriptions and confusion. I=B9ll review the rle-metrics draft and send comments today Alan On 10/23/13 10:04 AM, "Benoit Claise" wrote: > =20 > Hi Varun, > =20 > I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important. > =20 > Regards, Benoit > =20 > =20 >> Hi Benoit,=20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below: >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> In=20 >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metric= s-07 >> =20 >> I can add RTP in the following way in >> =20 >> =20 >> a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric >> =20 >> * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over the >> =20 >> period covered by this report. >> =20 >> =20 >> OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's comment from = his >> original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) >> =20 >> suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: >> =20 >> =20 >>> Other than a normative reference to =B3discard=B2 the definition of this bl= ock >>> does not require an RFC6390 metric template as it refers to a sufficien= tly >>> detailed definition in RFC3611. >> =20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> Which of the above option would be preferred? >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> In=20 >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-m= etric >> -00 >> =20 >> updated template will be: >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >> * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >> * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes discarde= d >> over the >> period covered by this report. >> =20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> Cheers, >> =20 >> Varun >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: >> =20 >> =20 >>> =20 >>> Hi Alan, >>> =20 >>> Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new version of the >>> draft. >>> My DISCUSS is at >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle= -metr >>> ics/ballot/#benoit-claise >>> I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into account. >>> On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not specific enoug= h. >>> For example the metric name doesn't even mention it's specific to RTP. = Same >>> thing for the metric description. >>> =20 >>> Regards, Benoit >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> -------- Original Message -------- >>> Subject: New Version Notification - >>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt >>> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 >>> From: >>> To: >>> , >>> = , >>> , >>> , >>> >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> A new version (-07) has been submitted for >>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-= rle-m >>> etrics-07.txt >>>=20 >>> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle= -metr >>> ics/ >>>=20 >>> Diff from previous version: >>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle= -metr >>> ics-07 >>>=20 >>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submi= ssion >>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org >>> . >>>=20 >>> IETF Secretariat. >>>=20 >>> . >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 --B_3465368260_526690 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rl= e-metrics-07.txt Hi Benoit

My comments related to RFC 6390 compliance for drafts have largely been tha= t RFC 6390 must be applied if the draft defines a metric but does not necess= arily need to be applied if the draft simply reports a metric that is define= d elsewhere. The objective should be to make sure that there is a single RFC= 6390 compliant definition of a metric - sometimes having multiple definitio= ns of the same thing can lead to divergent descriptions and confusion.

I’ll review the rle-metrics draft and send comments today

Alan


On 10/23/13 10:04 AM, "Benoit Claise" <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote:

<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12pt'>  
Hi Varun,
 
 I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important.
 
 Regards, Benoit
 
 
<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12pt'>Hi Benoit,

 
 
Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below:
 

 
 
In http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard= -rle-metrics-07
 
I can add RTP in the following way in
 
 
 a.  Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric  
   * Met= ric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over the
          period covered by th= is report.
 
 
OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's comment from his= original PM-DIr review email (July 2013)
 
suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below:
 
 
Other than a normative reference to “discard” the defin= ition of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as it refers= to a sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611.

 

 
 
Which of the above option would be preferred?
 

 
 
 
In https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-by= tes-discarded-metric-00
 
updated template  will be:
 
 
 
 a.  RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric
       *  Metric Name: RTP Payload = Bytes Discarded Metric
       *  Metric Description: Total= number of RTP payload bytes discarded over the
          period covered = by this report.
 
 

 
 
Cheers,
 
Varun
 

 
 
On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote:
 
 
 
 Hi Alan,
 
 Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new version of the= draft.
 My DISCUSS is at https://datatrac= ker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ballot/#beno= it-claise
 I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into account.<= BR>  On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not specific enou= gh. For example the metric name doesn't even mention it's specific to RTP. S= ame thing for the metric description.
 
 Regards, Benoit
 

 
 -------- Original Message --------   
 Subject:  New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-= discard-rle-metrics-07.txt  
 Date:  Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700  
 From:  <internet-drafts@ie= tf.org> <mailto:internet= -drafts@ietf.org>   
 To:  <xrblock-chairs@= tools.ietf.org> <ma= ilto:xrblock-chairs@tools.ietf.org> , <draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-disc= ard-rle-metrics@tools.ietf.org> <mailto:draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp= -xr-discard-rle-metrics@tools.ietf.org> , <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com> <mailto:gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com&g= t; , <bclaise@cisco.com> <mailto:bclaise@cisco.com> , <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> <mailto:spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.c= om>     
 
 
A new version (-07) has been submitted for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-disca= rd-rle-metrics:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrbl= ock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt

Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed


The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-= discard-rle-metrics/

Diff from previous version:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-x= r-discard-rle-metrics-07

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submissio= n
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org <http://tools.ietf.org> .

IETF Secretariat.

.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
--B_3465368260_526690-- From bclaise@cisco.com Sun Oct 27 15:06:43 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB7F821E80D0 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 15:06:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 70C2LtT+PvpI for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 15:06:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA6921E805F for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 15:06:31 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9RM6VB7006833 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:06:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (sweet-brew-5.cisco.com [144.254.10.206]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9RM6DFR021002 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:06:24 +0100 (CET) Received: (from bclaise@localhost) by sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id r9RM6AD9015478 for pm-dir@ietf.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:06:10 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:06:10 +0100 From: Benoit Claise To: pm-dir@ietf.org Message-ID: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 22:06:43 -0000 Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a normative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric". Regards, Benoit =========================================================== Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active From acmorton@att.com Sun Oct 27 16:29:34 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE3B211E81EC for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 16:29:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.58 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.981, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ygM9vNJWWzUw for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 16:29:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pink.research.att.com (mail-pink.research.att.com [204.178.8.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB3111E81F4 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 16:29:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-azure.research.att.com (unknown [135.207.255.18]) by mail-pink.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CD85120525; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 19:29:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.178.11]) by mail-azure.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF123E29DA; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 19:29:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com (unknown [135.207.255.242]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2261F00F2; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 19:29:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from NJFPSRVEXG8.research.att.com ([fe80::cdea:b3f6:3efa:1841]) by njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com ([fe80::a44a:8177:9a5d:ac00%15]) with mapi; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 19:29:25 -0400 From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" To: Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 19:29:17 -0400 Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: Ac7TYN90acHt1D7sSoeiyIjh3AeWOwABanRo Message-ID: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:29:35 -0000 pm-dir, After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts which= reference 6390 or=20 use the term "performance metric". This diff compares the doc state back to= the IETF-87 deadline. There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet ASAP. Al pm-dir admin [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew -------------------- --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active =20 Tracker state =20 +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state =20 @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state =20 -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active =20 =20 -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW =20 =20 +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active =20 +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active =20 =20 +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW =20 +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW =20 +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW =20 @@ -21,2 +19 @@ -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active =20 -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state =20 +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state =20 =20 @@ -23,0 +21 @@ +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW =20 [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ =20 ________________________________________ From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit= Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM To: pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a no= rmative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric= ". Regards, Benoit =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Oct 28 04:19:28 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F415011E81E3 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 04:19:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.793 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.793 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.194, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oa5CTWkR+jgK for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 04:19:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F61321E808A for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 04:19:18 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhggAPxGblKHCzI1/2dsb2JhbABZgmYhOFS3UIcUgSEWdIIlAQEBAQMBAQEPKDQXBAIBCA0EBAEBCxQJBycLFAkIAgQBEggah2UBDJtOnEkTBI4MgRgGMgaDGYENA55siyWDJoFxOQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,585,1378872000"; d="scan'208";a="34259883" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 07:19:17 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.11]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 07:09:39 -0400 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.11]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:19:16 +0100 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" , Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXiDg2eEvOA0GYUVAr+ghNL5oJdQGAgACCjIA= Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 11:19:15 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.46] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 11:19:28 -0000 Hi Al, I can review draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview, this is a document that I am f= ollowing anyway. My understanding is that it does not define new metrics, b= ut touches some performance measurements issues as part of the overview. Wh= at is the deadline? I hope Vancouver +1 week at least, otherwise I cannot c= ommit to anything. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1:29 AM > To: Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >=20 > pm-dir, >=20 > After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts > which reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff > compares the doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. >=20 > There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. > Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet > ASAP. >=20 > Al > pm-dir admin >=20 > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt > Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew > -------------------- > --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 > +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 > @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ > -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active >=20 > Tracker state > +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 > In IESG processing - ID > Tracker state > @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ > -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - > ID > Tracker state > -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active >=20 > -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW >=20 > +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active >=20 > +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW >=20 > +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW >=20 > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW >=20 > @@ -21,2 +19 @@ > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - > ID > Tracker state > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > ID > Tracker state >=20 > @@ -23,0 +21 @@ > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ > ________________________________________ > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Benoit Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM > To: pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >=20 > Dear all, >=20 > This is an automatically generated email. > It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a > normative or informative reference. > It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance > metric". >=20 > Regards, Benoit >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 > Normative References > -------------------- > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active >=20 > Informative References > ---------------------- > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > ID Tracker state > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active >=20 > drafts containing performance metric > ------------------------------------ > draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active > draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active > draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active > draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active > draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active > draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active > draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active > draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - > ID Tracker state > draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active > draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active > draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active > draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > ID Tracker state > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active > _______________________________________________ > pm-dir mailing list > pm-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir > _______________________________________________ > pm-dir mailing list > pm-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir From acmorton@att.com Mon Oct 28 06:03:10 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1462B11E8273 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:03:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u9J7mDwGyQhR for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:03:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pink.research.att.com (mail-pink.research.att.com [204.178.8.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E001811E8346 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:00:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-azure.research.att.com (unknown [135.207.255.18]) by mail-pink.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF9E812053F; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:01:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from njfpsrvexg1.research.att.com (njfpsrvexg1.research.att.com [135.207.177.20]) by mail-azure.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C23FE275F; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:00:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from concierge.research.att.com (135.207.255.39) by njfpsrvexg1.research.att.com (135.207.177.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.327.1; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:00:58 -0400 Received: from NJFPSRVEXG8.research.att.com ([fe80:0000:0000:0000:cdea:b3f6:62.250.24.65]) by concierge.research.att.com ([135.207.24.83]) with mapi; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:00:30 -0400 From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:57:07 -0400 Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXiDg2eEvOA0GYUVAr+ghNL5oJdQGAgACCjICAABwOYw== Message-ID: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CC@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:03:10 -0000 Hi Dan, It's up to Benoit if he wants to add more reviews, but I've already reviewed that draft for pm-dir (and was recently asked to check if my review was=20 resolved - it was). oam-overview is not marked as "<<< NEW", but about 5 other drafts are... regards, Al ________________________________________ From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 7:19 AM To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Hi Al, I can review draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview, this is a document that I am f= ollowing anyway. My understanding is that it does not define new metrics, b= ut touches some performance measurements issues as part of the overview. Wh= at is the deadline? I hope Vancouver +1 week at least, otherwise I cannot c= ommit to anything. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1:29 AM > To: Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > pm-dir, > > After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts > which reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff > compares the doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. > > There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. > Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet > ASAP. > > Al > pm-dir admin > > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt > Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew > -------------------- > --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 > +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 > @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ > -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active > > Tracker state > +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 > In IESG processing - ID > Tracker state > @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ > -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - > ID > Tracker state > -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active > > -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW > > +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > > +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW > > +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW > > @@ -21,2 +19 @@ > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - > ID > Tracker state > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > ID > Tracker state > > @@ -23,0 +21 @@ > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ > ________________________________________ > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Benoit Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM > To: pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > Dear all, > > This is an automatically generated email. > It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a > normative or informative reference. > It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance > metric". > > Regards, Benoit > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > Normative References > -------------------- > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > Informative References > ---------------------- > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > ID Tracker state > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > > drafts containing performance metric > ------------------------------------ > draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active > draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active > draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active > draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active > draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active > draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active > draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active > draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - > ID Tracker state > draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active > draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active > draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active > draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > ID Tracker state > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active > _______________________________________________ > pm-dir mailing list > pm-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir > _______________________________________________ > pm-dir mailing list > pm-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir= From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Oct 28 06:05:58 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E111311E826F for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:05:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.79 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.191, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bsGi2hoF5VBc for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:05:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E9621F9A49 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:05:45 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhggANJgblLGmAcV/2dsb2JhbABZgmYhOFS3UIcUgSIWdIIlAQEBAQMBAQEPKDQXBAIBCA0EBAEBCxQJBycLFAkIAgQBEggah2UBDJswnFITBI4MgRgGMgaDGYENA55siyWDJoFxOQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,586,1378872000"; d="scan'208";a="34271808" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest-exch.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.21]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 09:05:09 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.11]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 09:00:07 -0400 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.11]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:05:07 +0100 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" , Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXiDg2eEvOA0GYUVAr+ghNL5oJdQGAgACCjICAABwOY4AAAZ8w Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:05:07 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1291A279@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CC@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CC@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.46] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:05:58 -0000 Oh, I see, I missed the fact that you are looking for volunteers only for t= hese marked as NEW.=20 Out of the 5, two are from xrblock which I am chairing. We are left with th= ree which are actually two because you list two different versions of draft= -ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage (7 and 10). Let me take this one - same question abo= ut deadline for review.=20 Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) [mailto:acmorton@att.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 2:57 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >=20 > Hi Dan, >=20 > It's up to Benoit if he wants to add more reviews, but I've already > reviewed that draft for pm-dir (and was recently asked to check if my > review was resolved - it was). >=20 > oam-overview is not marked as "<<< NEW", but about 5 other drafts are... >=20 > regards, > Al >=20 > ________________________________________ > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 7:19 AM > To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >=20 > Hi Al, >=20 > I can review draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview, this is a document that I > am following anyway. My understanding is that it does not define new > metrics, but touches some performance measurements issues as part of the > overview. What is the deadline? I hope Vancouver +1 week at least, > otherwise I cannot commit to anything. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Dan >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1:29 AM > > To: Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > > > pm-dir, > > > > After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts > > which reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff > > compares the doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. > > > > There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. > > Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet > > ASAP. > > > > Al > > pm-dir admin > > > > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt > > Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew > > -------------------- > > --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 > > +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 > > @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ > > -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active > > > > Tracker state > > +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 > > In IESG processing - ID Tracker state > for AD Go-Ahead::Revised I-D Needed> @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ > > -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing > - > > ID > > Tracker state > > -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active > > > > -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW > > > > +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > > +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > > > > +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW > > > > +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW > > > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW > > > > @@ -21,2 +19 @@ > > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active > > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing > - > > ID > > Tracker state > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing > - > > ID > > Tracker state > > > > @@ -23,0 +21 @@ > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW > > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ > > ________________________________________ > > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > > Benoit Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] > > Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM > > To: pm-dir@ietf.org > > Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > > > Dear all, > > > > This is an automatically generated email. > > It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as > > a normative or informative reference. > > It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance > > metric". > > > > Regards, Benoit > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > Normative References > > -------------------- > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > > > Informative References > > ---------------------- > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > > ID Tracker state > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > > > > drafts containing performance metric > > ------------------------------------ > > draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active > > draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active > > draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active > > draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - > > ID Tracker state > > draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active > > draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > > draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > > draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active > > draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > > ID Tracker state > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active > > _______________________________________________ > > pm-dir mailing list > > pm-dir@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir > > _______________________________________________ > > pm-dir mailing list > > pm-dir@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir From bclaise@cisco.com Mon Oct 28 06:08:28 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 440EB11E8266 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:08:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.512 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.087, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zJHSIY95v0rn for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:08:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-3.cisco.com (ams-iport-3.cisco.com [144.254.224.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4578511E8272 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:08:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6074; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1382965701; x=1384175301; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ur85w4ldZ0GW+jF89rEGdOVvEndljAsMX3kgVLCvwg0=; b=LmS4JOUnGHrLchCRY+2ufZR5FYiCuLKosHIz6QzbRajol+EOufpXVhlz yFSY+McmIwdAvj9OMhDsZHOEG/iPJbBH0NXRGFiZ95wrC2kSv/En6IjyU Zkm+CSzF729rf+HxhiBKrOhD6YLBC325J718OuVOrVefmgKAWNyK9Ulrp w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag4gAJpgblKQ/khL/2dsb2JhbABZgwc4uCSHFIEiFnSCJQEBAQQBAQE1NgoBDAQLEQQBAQEJFggHCQMCAQIBFR8JCAYNAQUCAQGIAw24FgSODIEWMwcGhCYDmAqGO4tMgyc7gTU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,586,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="18592386" Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 13:08:20 +0000 Received: from [10.60.67.84] (ams-bclaise-8913.cisco.com [10.60.67.84]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9SD8Es9021731; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:08:16 GMT Message-ID: <526E61BE.9000609@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:08:14 +0100 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "pm-dir@ietf.org" , "MORTON, ALFRED C \(AL\)" , "opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:08:28 -0000 On 28/10/2013 12:19, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: > Hi Al, > > I can review draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview, this is a document that I am following anyway. My understanding is that it does not define new metrics, but touches some performance measurements issues as part of the overview. That's my understanding as well. However, Dan, since you provided some feedback on that draft in the past, and since it improves significantly, I would interested to understand if your concerns have been addressed. Note that this draft will go through OPSAWG WG LC again Regards, Benoit > What is the deadline? I hope Vancouver +1 week at least, otherwise I cannot commit to anything. > > Regards, > > Dan > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf >> Of MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) >> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1:29 AM >> To: Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >> >> pm-dir, >> >> After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts >> which reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff >> compares the doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. >> >> There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. >> Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet >> ASAP. >> >> Al >> pm-dir admin >> >> [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt >> Diffs from Last Time -=old, +=new >> -------------------- >> --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 >> +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 >> @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ >> -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active >> >> Tracker state >> +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 >> In IESG processing - ID >> Tracker state >> @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ >> -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - >> ID >> Tracker state >> -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active >> >> -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW >> >> +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active >> +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active >> >> +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW >> >> +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW >> >> +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW >> >> @@ -21,2 +19 @@ >> -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active >> -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - >> ID >> Tracker state >> +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - >> ID >> Tracker state >> >> @@ -23,0 +21 @@ >> +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW >> [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ >> ________________________________________ >> From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >> Benoit Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] >> Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM >> To: pm-dir@ietf.org >> Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >> >> Dear all, >> >> This is an automatically generated email. >> It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a >> normative or informative reference. >> It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance >> metric". >> >> Regards, Benoit >> >> =========================================================== >> >> Normative References >> -------------------- >> draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active >> >> Informative References >> ---------------------- >> draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - >> ID Tracker state >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active >> >> drafts containing performance metric >> ------------------------------------ >> draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active >> draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active >> draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active >> draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active >> draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - >> ID Tracker state >> draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active >> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active >> draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active >> draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active >> draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active >> draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - >> ID Tracker state >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active >> _______________________________________________ >> pm-dir mailing list >> pm-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir >> _______________________________________________ >> pm-dir mailing list >> pm-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir > . > From bclaise@cisco.com Mon Oct 28 06:09:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57EE521E8063 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:09:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.513 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.513 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.086, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tzhQx5G0EA+8 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-4.cisco.com (ams-iport-4.cisco.com [144.254.224.147]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2905711E8272 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:09:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6382; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1382965759; x=1384175359; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WPdqbsO5pe04ihQn38qHasFLphzY0oxK71Kt1PTe1KM=; b=FuBYHNybwnTiG1ydxUWGn9M6xFOREC6g+kLbVh7OCoEljoC4xdEpZgU+ Uooehu88Ev1wa9elpOTcb9E6p9Le3ObbnSCOJhMTdlDV6i25rf/h86b6b I6ozRSWG1Ipdb2BlGIfnXqZxmmCg7Ksd1ySYay81RwnMr4L6D2zKCrv0v w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag4gANJgblKQ/khL/2dsb2JhbABZgwc4uCSHFIEiFnSCJQEBAQQBAQE1NgoBDAQLEQQBAQoWCAcJAwIBAgEVHwkIBg0BBQIBAYgDDbgVBI4MgRYzBwaEJgOYCoY7i0yDJzuBNQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,586,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="19068241" Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 13:09:17 +0000 Received: from [10.60.67.84] (ams-bclaise-8913.cisco.com [10.60.67.84]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9SD9CiL021951; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:09:14 GMT Message-ID: <526E61F8.5020800@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:09:12 +0100 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CC@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CC@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:09:44 -0000 Hi, > Hi Dan, > > It's up to Benoit if he wants to add more reviews, > but I've already reviewed that draft for pm-dir > (and was recently asked to check if my review was > resolved - it was). Well, it seems that this one is covered from a pm-dir point of view. Regards, Benoit > > oam-overview is not marked as "<<< NEW", > but about 5 other drafts are... > > regards, > Al > > ________________________________________ > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 7:19 AM > To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > Hi Al, > > I can review draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview, this is a document that I am following anyway. My understanding is that it does not define new metrics, but touches some performance measurements issues as part of the overview. What is the deadline? I hope Vancouver +1 week at least, otherwise I cannot commit to anything. > > Regards, > > Dan > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf >> Of MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) >> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1:29 AM >> To: Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >> >> pm-dir, >> >> After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts >> which reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff >> compares the doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. >> >> There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. >> Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet >> ASAP. >> >> Al >> pm-dir admin >> >> [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt >> Diffs from Last Time -=old, +=new >> -------------------- >> --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 >> +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 >> @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ >> -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active >> >> Tracker state >> +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 >> In IESG processing - ID >> Tracker state >> @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ >> -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - >> ID >> Tracker state >> -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active >> >> -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW >> >> +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active >> +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active >> >> +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW >> >> +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW >> >> +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW >> >> @@ -21,2 +19 @@ >> -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active >> -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - >> ID >> Tracker state >> +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - >> ID >> Tracker state >> >> @@ -23,0 +21 @@ >> +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW >> [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ >> ________________________________________ >> From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >> Benoit Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] >> Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM >> To: pm-dir@ietf.org >> Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >> >> Dear all, >> >> This is an automatically generated email. >> It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a >> normative or informative reference. >> It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance >> metric". >> >> Regards, Benoit >> >> =========================================================== >> >> Normative References >> -------------------- >> draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active >> >> Informative References >> ---------------------- >> draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - >> ID Tracker state >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active >> >> drafts containing performance metric >> ------------------------------------ >> draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active >> draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active >> draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active >> draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active >> draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active >> draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - >> ID Tracker state >> draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active >> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active >> draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active >> draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active >> draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active >> draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - >> ID Tracker state >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active >> _______________________________________________ >> pm-dir mailing list >> pm-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir >> _______________________________________________ >> pm-dir mailing list >> pm-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir. From acmorton@att.com Mon Oct 28 06:15:34 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C11211E8268 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:15:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KuiTTTAcVNcy for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:15:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pink.research.att.com (mail-pink.research.att.com [204.178.8.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82F8F11E8262 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-azure.research.att.com (unknown [135.207.255.18]) by mail-pink.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB6111200F3; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:15:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from njfpsrvexg2.research.att.com (njfpsrvexg2.research.att.com [135.207.160.21]) by mail-azure.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40F92E275F; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:15:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from concierge.research.att.com (135.207.255.39) by njfpsrvexg2.research.att.com (135.207.160.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.327.1; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:15:02 -0400 Received: from NJFPSRVEXG8.research.att.com ([fe80:0000:0000:0000:cdea:b3f6:62.250.24.65]) by concierge.research.att.com ([135.207.24.83]) with mapi; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:15:02 -0400 From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:10:18 -0400 Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXiDg2eEvOA0GYUVAr+ghNL5oJdQGAgACCjICAABwOY4AAAZ8wgAACE4Q= Message-ID: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CF@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CC@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1291A279@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1291A279@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:15:34 -0000 Hi Dan, Since we don't have an external request to review any of the new drafts yet= , we also do not have hard deadlines, so I think that Vancouver +1 or 2 weeks= =20 is fine. I listed -rtcweb-rtp-usage twice to show how fast this draft is advancing, 3 updates since IETF-87, so we should try to catch-up with this one quickly= . Al ________________________________________ From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 9:05 AM To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Oh, I see, I missed the fact that you are looking for volunteers only for t= hese marked as NEW. Out of the 5, two are from xrblock which I am chairing. We are left with th= ree which are actually two because you list two different versions of draft= -ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage (7 and 10). Let me take this one - same question abo= ut deadline for review. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) [mailto:acmorton@att.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 2:57 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > Hi Dan, > > It's up to Benoit if he wants to add more reviews, but I've already > reviewed that draft for pm-dir (and was recently asked to check if my > review was resolved - it was). > > oam-overview is not marked as "<<< NEW", but about 5 other drafts are... > > regards, > Al > > ________________________________________ > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 7:19 AM > To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > Hi Al, > > I can review draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview, this is a document that I > am following anyway. My understanding is that it does not define new > metrics, but touches some performance measurements issues as part of the > overview. What is the deadline? I hope Vancouver +1 week at least, > otherwise I cannot commit to anything. > > Regards, > > Dan > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1:29 AM > > To: Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > > > pm-dir, > > > > After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts > > which reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff > > compares the doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. > > > > There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. > > Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet > > ASAP. > > > > Al > > pm-dir admin > > > > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt > > Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew > > -------------------- > > --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 > > +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 > > @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ > > -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active > > > > Tracker state > > +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 > > In IESG processing - ID Tracker state > for AD Go-Ahead::Revised I-D Needed> @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ > > -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing > - > > ID > > Tracker state > > -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active > > > > -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW > > > > +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > > +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > > > > +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW > > > > +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW > > > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW > > > > @@ -21,2 +19 @@ > > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active > > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing > - > > ID > > Tracker state > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing > - > > ID > > Tracker state > > > > @@ -23,0 +21 @@ > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW > > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ > > ________________________________________ > > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > > Benoit Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] > > Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM > > To: pm-dir@ietf.org > > Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > > > Dear all, > > > > This is an automatically generated email. > > It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as > > a normative or informative reference. > > It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance > > metric". > > > > Regards, Benoit > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > Normative References > > -------------------- > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > > > Informative References > > ---------------------- > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > > ID Tracker state > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > > > > drafts containing performance metric > > ------------------------------------ > > draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active > > draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active > > draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active > > draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - > > ID Tracker state > > draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active > > draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > > draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > > draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active > > draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - > > ID Tracker state > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active > > _______________________________________________ > > pm-dir mailing list > > pm-dir@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir > > _______________________________________________ > > pm-dir mailing list > > pm-dir@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir= From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Oct 28 06:17:47 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81AF411E8341 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:17:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.786 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.786 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.187, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J-ObCJtheHA4 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4296111E826F for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:17:12 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhggACxjblKHCzI1/2dsb2JhbABZgmYhOFS3UIcUgSIWdIIlAQEBAQMBAQEPKDQXBAIBCA0EBAEBCxQJBycLFAkIAgQBEggah2UBDJstnFITBI4MgRgGMgaDGYENA55siyWDJoFxOQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,586,1378872000"; d="scan'208";a="34273656" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 09:17:08 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.11]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 09:07:30 -0400 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.11]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:17:06 +0100 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" , Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXiDg2eEvOA0GYUVAr+ghNL5oJdQGAgACCjICAABwOY4AAAZ8wgAACE4SAAAHM4A== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:17:06 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1291A323@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA12919F16@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CC@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1291A279@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CF@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CF@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.46] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:17:47 -0000 I will try to review it before 11/18.=20 Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) [mailto:acmorton@att.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 3:10 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >=20 > Hi Dan, >=20 > Since we don't have an external request to review any of the new drafts > yet, we also do not have hard deadlines, so I think that Vancouver +1 or > 2 weeks is fine. >=20 > I listed -rtcweb-rtp-usage twice to show how fast this draft is > advancing, > 3 updates since IETF-87, so we should try to catch-up with this one > quickly. >=20 > Al >=20 > ________________________________________ > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 9:05 AM > To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email >=20 > Oh, I see, I missed the fact that you are looking for volunteers only > for these marked as NEW. >=20 > Out of the 5, two are from xrblock which I am chairing. We are left with > three which are actually two because you list two different versions of > draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage (7 and 10). Let me take this one - same > question about deadline for review. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Dan >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) [mailto:acmorton@att.com] > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 2:57 PM > > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > It's up to Benoit if he wants to add more reviews, but I've already > > reviewed that draft for pm-dir (and was recently asked to check if my > > review was resolved - it was). > > > > oam-overview is not marked as "<<< NEW", but about 5 other drafts > are... > > > > regards, > > Al > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com] > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 7:19 AM > > To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > > > Hi Al, > > > > I can review draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview, this is a document that I > > am following anyway. My understanding is that it does not define new > > metrics, but touches some performance measurements issues as part of > > the overview. What is the deadline? I hope Vancouver +1 week at least, > > otherwise I cannot commit to anything. > > > > Regards, > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On > > > Behalf Of MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) > > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1:29 AM > > > To: Benoit Claise; pm-dir@ietf.org > > > Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > > > > > pm-dir, > > > > > > After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the > > > drafts which reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". > > > This diff compares the doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. > > > > > > There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. > > > Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet > > > ASAP. > > > > > > Al > > > pm-dir admin > > > > > > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, > > > +=3Dnew > > > -------------------- > > > --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 > > > +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 > > > @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ > > > -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active > > > > > > Tracker state > > > +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 > > > In IESG processing - ID Tracker state > > > @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ > > > -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG > processing > > - > > > ID > > > Tracker state > > > -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active > > > > > > -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW > > > > > > +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > > > +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > > > > > > +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW > > > > > > +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW > > > > > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW > > > > > > @@ -21,2 +19 @@ > > > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active > > > -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG > processing > > - > > > ID > > > Tracker state > > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG > processing > > - > > > ID > > > Tracker state > > > > > > @@ -23,0 +21 @@ > > > +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW > > > [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > > > Benoit Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] > > > Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM > > > To: pm-dir@ietf.org > > > Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > This is an automatically generated email. > > > It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, > > > as a normative or informative reference. > > > It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance > > > metric". > > > > > > Regards, Benoit > > > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > > > Normative References > > > -------------------- > > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > > > > > Informative References > > > ---------------------- > > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing > - > > > ID Tracker state > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > > > > > > drafts containing performance metric > > > ------------------------------------ > > > draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active > > > draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active > > > draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active > > > draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active > > > draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active > > > draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active > > > draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active > > > draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active > > > draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active > > > draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing > - > > > ID Tracker state > > > draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active > > > draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active > > > draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active > > > draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active > > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active > > > draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing > - > > > ID Tracker state > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active > > > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active > > > _______________________________________________ > > > pm-dir mailing list > > > pm-dir@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir > > > _______________________________________________ > > > pm-dir mailing list > > > pm-dir@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir From janovak@cisco.com Mon Oct 28 06:29:40 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D853B21F9FAE for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:29:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GWwGfuEqGJnu for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:29:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8493E11E82B6 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:29:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5543; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1382966974; x=1384176574; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=MC7FxcFvVP/oG7QQyXl3JChMsBrBIQmSfK36NKaq+cU=; b=gLCIGGTZM90lxB09fVQLlWNyO9bCLLLwJ2iLLpONmaKDXCHeTXP3p6OD 150Pz24B5Xn7mOWgMgRE/e2IynfvM3TEYQ9RFuSMFuKHeFNVCHDvloJkB x7EOoRaGAxXzjGTJ6A0raP9tIYvZWKPovrlWYOZR9hkgnZULYSNaiSVHs U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhAgAPllblKtJV2d/2dsb2JhbABUBYMHOFS3UIcUgSIWdIIlAQEBBAEBATc0FwQCAQgRBAEBCxQJBycLFAkIAgQBEgiHfw24CgSODB56BjIGgxmBDQOqEYMmgXE5 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,586,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="277511505" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 13:29:34 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com [173.36.12.82]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9SDTXMc003683 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:29:33 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.6.192]) by xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com ([173.36.12.82]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:29:33 -0500 From: "Jan Novak (janovak)" To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" , "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXmiQ6MtUALEOgGrIbruPStJoJhcWAgACWxDA= Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:29:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.147.1.27] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:29:41 -0000 Al, I could review one but I am just leaving for 3 weeks of Holiday - so nothing what needs to be done urgently ... Jan The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak succumb young, and the stron= g envy them .... Dr. Johnson -----Original Message----- From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) Sent: 27 October 2013 23:29 To: Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email pm-dir, After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts which= reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff compares th= e doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet ASAP. Al pm-dir admin [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew -------------------- --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active =20 Tracker state =20 +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state =20 @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state =20 -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active =20 =20 -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW =20 =20 +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active =20 +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active =20 =20 +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW =20 +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW =20 +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW =20 @@ -21,2 +19 @@ -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active =20 -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state =20 +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state =20 =20 @@ -23,0 +21 @@ +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW =20 [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ ________________________________________ From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit= Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM To: pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a no= rmative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric= ". Regards, Benoit =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir From acmorton@att.com Mon Oct 28 06:47:19 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB4421F9D1E for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:47:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.464 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.464 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.865, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CIihXHEfS-ez for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pink.research.att.com (mail-pink.research.att.com [204.178.8.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A79F11E8199 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-azure.research.att.com (unknown [135.207.255.18]) by mail-pink.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43879120555; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:47:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.178.11]) by mail-azure.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD522E275F; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:47:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from njfpsrvexg1.research.att.com (njfpsrvexg1.research.att.com [135.207.177.20]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B731CF012C; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:47:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from NJFPSRVEXG8.research.att.com ([fe80::cdea:b3f6:3efa:1841]) by njfpsrvexg1.research.att.com ([fe80::58ce:ca01:5d18:db01%13]) with mapi; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:47:13 -0400 From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" To: "Jan Novak (janovak)" , "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:45:09 -0400 Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXmiQ6MtUALEOgGrIbruPStJoJhcWAgACWxDCAAASDTQ== Message-ID: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015D1@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:47:19 -0000 Hi Jan, that's not a problem, AFAIK. Pick a draft that interests you from the=20 three new ones (Dan will do rtcweb-rtp-useage). thanks, Al ________________________________________ From: Jan Novak (janovak) [janovak@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 9:29 AM To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Al, I could review one but I am just leaving for 3 weeks of Holiday - so nothing what needs to be done urgently ... Jan The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak succumb young, and the stron= g envy them .... Dr. Johnson -----Original Message----- From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) Sent: 27 October 2013 23:29 To: Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email pm-dir, After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts which= reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff compares th= e doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet ASAP. Al pm-dir admin [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew -------------------- --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active Tracker state +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW @@ -21,2 +19 @@ -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state @@ -23,0 +21 @@ +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ ________________________________________ From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit= Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM To: pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a no= rmative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric= ". Regards, Benoit =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir= From janovak@cisco.com Mon Oct 28 06:56:31 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25B6311E8324 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:56:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7FtsT5RwAI9f for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E1111E8278 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 06:56:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6277; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1382968567; x=1384178167; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=VwDXt0po0OKvvbg71RpHhT1iVp7h9ypFXrLHPXvZdx4=; b=HLsY2PjCPil90CYy5UHtTnaLxCnGacetgxZg86QHpeJmLlji+16Ktl1g rwQ5/qusrekjxn/HzCXYjNk0K2p6Od7ZQFGbPqSAK9JEpImi2PmxBEb/g i0HhEGl/UmRpZzfktbRK6P/pVCmvOl84+WntZbEk3TJ16G4VO/xA8VhNf 8=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhAgANprblKtJXHA/2dsb2JhbABUBYMHOFS3UIcUgSMWdIIlAQEBBAEBATc0FwQCAQgRBAEBCxQJBycLFAkIAgQBEgiHfw24CQSODB56BjIGgxmBDQOqEYMmgXE5 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,586,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="277522035" Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2013 13:56:06 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com [173.36.12.84]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9SDu5NZ025761 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:56:05 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.6.192]) by xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com ([173.36.12.84]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:56:05 -0500 From: "Jan Novak (janovak)" To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" , "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXmiQ6MtUALEOgGrIbruPStJoJhcWAgACWxDCAAASDTYAAAwQA Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:56:05 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015D1@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015D1@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.147.1.27] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:56:31 -0000 Hi, Ok, I will do draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Jan The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak succumb young, and the stron= g envy them .... Dr. Johnson -----Original Message----- From: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) [mailto:acmorton@att.com]=20 Sent: 28 October 2013 13:45 To: Jan Novak (janovak); Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Hi Jan, that's not a problem, AFAIK. Pick a draft that interests you from the three new ones (Dan will do rtcwe= b-rtp-useage). thanks, Al ________________________________________ From: Jan Novak (janovak) [janovak@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 9:29 AM To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Al, I could review one but I am just leaving for 3 weeks of Holiday - so nothin= g what needs to be done urgently ... Jan The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak succumb young, and the stron= g envy them .... Dr. Johnson -----Original Message----- From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) Sent: 27 October 2013 23:29 To: Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email pm-dir, After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts which= reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff compares th= e doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet ASAP. Al pm-dir admin [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew -------------------- --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active Tracker state +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW @@ -21,2 +19 @@ -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state @@ -23,0 +21 @@ +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ ________________________________________ From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit= Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM To: pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a no= rmative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric= ". Regards, Benoit =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir From acmorton@att.com Mon Oct 28 07:51:10 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623F011E817E for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 07:51:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.932 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.932 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vQux4ak7GqL2 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 07:51:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pink.research.att.com (mail-pink.research.att.com [204.178.8.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BBBE21F9FA3 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 07:51:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-azure.research.att.com (unknown [135.207.255.18]) by mail-pink.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B663F120574; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:51:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.178.11]) by mail-azure.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C4C6E275F; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:51:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from njfpsrvexg2.research.att.com (njfpsrvexg2.research.att.com [135.207.160.21]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16DD4F012C; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:51:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from concierge.research.att.com (135.207.255.39) by njfpsrvexg2.research.att.com (135.207.160.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.327.1; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:50:53 -0400 Received: from NJFPSRVEXG8.research.att.com ([fe80:0000:0000:0000:cdea:b3f6:62.250.24.65]) by concierge.research.att.com ([135.207.24.83]) with mapi; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:50:53 -0400 From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" To: "Jan Novak (janovak)" , "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" , "pm-dir@ietf.org" Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:49:46 -0400 Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Thread-Index: AQHO02DXmiQ6MtUALEOgGrIbruPStJoJhcWAgACWxDCAAASDTYAAAwQAgAAPDPY= Message-ID: <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015D3@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> References: <20131027220610.GA15476@sweet-brew-5.cisco.com> <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015CA@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C8ABE015D1@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com>, In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:51:10 -0000 Thanks Jan! Just two RTCPXR drafts are left, who will review them? Al ________________________________________ From: Jan Novak (janovak) [janovak@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 9:56 AM To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Hi, Ok, I will do draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Jan The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak succumb young, and the stron= g envy them .... Dr. Johnson -----Original Message----- From: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) [mailto:acmorton@att.com] Sent: 28 October 2013 13:45 To: Jan Novak (janovak); Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Hi Jan, that's not a problem, AFAIK. Pick a draft that interests you from the three new ones (Dan will do rtcwe= b-rtp-useage). thanks, Al ________________________________________ From: Jan Novak (janovak) [janovak@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 9:29 AM To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Al, I could review one but I am just leaving for 3 weeks of Holiday - so nothin= g what needs to be done urgently ... Jan The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak succumb young, and the stron= g envy them .... Dr. Johnson -----Original Message----- From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) Sent: 27 October 2013 23:29 To: Benoit Claise (bclaise); pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email pm-dir, After the submission deadline, I was able to run a diff on the drafts which= reference 6390 or use the term "performance metric". This diff compares th= e doc state back to the IETF-87 deadline. There are about five new drafts we can review, noted below. Please volunteer, I will list these on the google drive spread sheet ASAP. Al pm-dir admin [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ cat diff.txt Diffs from Last Time -=3Dold, +=3Dnew -------------------- --- pmol-old-content.txt 2013-07-19 +++ pmol-uniq-content.txt 2013-10-25 13:28:11.141044525 -0400 @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ -draft-ietf-alto-deployments-07 Active Tracker state +draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state @@ -11,9 +12,6 @@ -draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-09 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state -draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-01 Active -draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-07 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active +draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active +draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active <<< NEW +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active <<< NEW @@ -21,2 +19 @@ -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-10 Active -draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-summary-stat-11 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID Tracker state @@ -23,0 +21 @@ +draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active <<< NEW [system@dell4-4 pm-dir]$ ________________________________________ From: pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org [pm-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit= Claise [bclaise@cisco.com] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:06 PM To: pm-dir@ietf.org Subject: [pm-dir] Performance metrics doctors generated email Dear all, This is an automatically generated email. It lists the IETF internet-drafts that reference the PMOL RFC 6390, as a no= rmative or informative reference. It also lists all the IETF internet-drafts that contain "performance metric= ". Regards, Benoit =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Normative References -------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active Informative References ---------------------- draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active drafts containing performance metric ------------------------------------ draft-ietf-alto-deployments-08 Active draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-01Active draft-ietf-ippm-2330-update-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-model-based-metrics-01 Active draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-04 Active draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-04 Active draft-ietf-lmap-framework-01 Active draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-00 Active draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-03 Active draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-10 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-base-tracker-protocol-02 Active draft-ietf-ppsp-peer-protocol-08 Active draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10 Active draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-00 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-08 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-12 In IESG processing - ID T= racker state draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-06 Active draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-00 Active _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir _______________________________________________ pm-dir mailing list pm-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir= From gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com Mon Oct 28 08:58:00 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC0E021E809B for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:58:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.662 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.662 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.587, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iGMtABao5Z3x for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:57:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675DE11E8185 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:57:30 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7f738e000003ee3-83-526e8969b10c Received: from ESESSHC020.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 21.0C.16099.9698E625; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:57:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from [147.214.22.47] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.80) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.328.9; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:57:28 +0100 Message-ID: <526E8968.9070107@ericsson.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:57:28 +0100 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Clark References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrDLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvjW5mZ16QwePn8hYT3zBbHH0sYTF9 Rz+bxdEPlhYzTnA4sHpM+b2R1ePssqlMHkuW/GTyODb/HKPHl8uf2QJYo7hsUlJzMstSi/Tt ErgyJtw6xl4wTadi2ZvpjA2Mu6S6GDk5JARMJGY82soCYYtJXLi3nq2LkYtDSOAQo8Tj3jYo ZzWjxJIjZ5lAqngFtCXu7pgL1sEioCrx6N9idhCbTcBCYsut+2BxUYEoiQ3bL7BA1AtKnJz5 BMwWEdCSeNp7jAlkKLPANkaJ04ensoEkhAViJdpnrQSzhQTMJGbevwPWwClgLrH91nImiPMk Jba8aAdbxixgIHFk0RxWCFteonnrbGaIXm2J5c9aWCYwCs1CsnsWkpZZSFoWMDKvYmTPTczM SS833MQIDPGDW37r7mA8dU7kEKM0B4uSOO+Ht85BQgLpiSWp2ampBalF8UWlOanFhxiZODil Ghhn+yuee/8k6ETtr9i5fhfmFOy4oyZbf6Pv1qpdEzl79K5ov4tILXq/XvXdPKutD6aIGb7e H7d01yvruZoW98TTPQ+dWrjfX/zR3b2nLd//75oneW23SbqEi9nv1f+M3xcqLzBkE3q0pCzv voJc99tb6VlZZYccuMzijM9HGT3hL1lo+Ty2bCaPEktxRqKhFnNRcSIA08jeST8CAAA= Cc: Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" , Varun Singh , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 15:58:00 -0000 Alan, Benoit, what is the status of this? Thanks, Gonzalo On 23/10/2013 4:17 PM, Alan Clark wrote: > Hi Benoit > > My comments related to RFC 6390 compliance for drafts have largely been > that RFC 6390 must be applied if the draft defines a metric but does not > necessarily need to be applied if the draft simply reports a metric that > is defined elsewhere. The objective should be to make sure that there is > a single RFC 6390 compliant definition of a metric - sometimes having > multiple definitions of the same thing can lead to divergent > descriptions and confusion. > > I’ll review the rle-metrics draft and send comments today > > Alan > > > On 10/23/13 10:04 AM, "Benoit Claise" wrote: > > > Hi Varun, > > I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important. > > Regards, Benoit > > > > Hi Benoit, > > > > Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below: > > > > > In > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07 > > I can add RTP in the following way in > > > a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric > > * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over the > > period covered by this report. > > > OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's > comment from his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) > > suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: > > > > Other than a normative reference to “discard” the definition > of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as > it refers to a sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611. > > > > > > > Which of the above option would be preferred? > > > > > > In > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric-00 > > updated template will be: > > > > a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric > * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric > * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes > discarded over the > period covered by this report. > > > > > > Cheers, > > Varun > > > > > On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: > > > > > Hi Alan, > > Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new > version of the draft. > My DISCUSS is at > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ballot/#benoit-claise > I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into > account. > On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not > specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even > mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric > description. > > Regards, Benoit > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: New Version Notification - > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 > From: > > To: > , > > > , > , > , > > > > > A new version (-07) has been submitted for > draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt > > Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed > > > The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics/ > > Diff from previous version: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07 > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the > time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at > tools.ietf.org . > > IETF Secretariat. > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > From alan.d.clark@telchemy.com Mon Oct 28 09:16:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D941B11E8192 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:16:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZZMBdIDZAn33 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:16:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omx.cbeyond.com (omx.cbeyond.com [50.20.30.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F4311E818A for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:16:40 -0700 (PDT) X-SBRS: None X-HAT: Sender Group ONNET_RELAY, Policy $ACCEPTED applied. X-Hostname: omx03bay.sys.cbeyond.net X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqwBAI+NblJFD9PB/2dsb2JhbAANTIM/Tr5qIYEbgxkBAQEDATwBOgIFBwYBCA0EAwECARUSKCUJCAEBBA4FCYdsAwkLAwWlLYk+DYlrjGWBJ4EWCCsHBgSEIgOJB40XAYMahTOFbocfgVqBVQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,586,1378872000"; d="scan'208";a="70601485" Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.125]) ([69.15.211.193]) by omx.cbeyond.com with ESMTP/TLS/DES-CBC3-SHA; 28 Oct 2013 12:16:39 -0400 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.32.0.111121 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:16:27 -0400 From: Alan Clark To: Gonzalo Camarillo Message-ID: Thread-Topic: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt Thread-Index: Ac7T+Q2ruBLvH57qXEmZ1/4q7EmhSw== In-Reply-To: <526E8968.9070107@ericsson.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" , Varun Singh , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:16:45 -0000 Gonzalo It is waiting for me - and I'll get it done asap Regards Alan On 10/28/13 11:57 AM, "Gonzalo Camarillo" wrote: > Alan, Benoit, >=20 > what is the status of this? >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Gonzalo >=20 > On 23/10/2013 4:17 PM, Alan Clark wrote: >> Hi Benoit >>=20 >> My comments related to RFC 6390 compliance for drafts have largely been >> that RFC 6390 must be applied if the draft defines a metric but does not >> necessarily need to be applied if the draft simply reports a metric that >> is defined elsewhere. The objective should be to make sure that there is >> a single RFC 6390 compliant definition of a metric - sometimes having >> multiple definitions of the same thing can lead to divergent >> descriptions and confusion. >>=20 >> I=B9ll review the rle-metrics draft and send comments today >>=20 >> Alan >>=20 >>=20 >> On 10/23/13 10:04 AM, "Benoit Claise" wrote: >>=20 >> =20 >> Hi Varun, >> =20 >> I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important. >> =20 >> Regards, Benoit >> =20 >> =20 >>=20 >> Hi Benoit, >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below: >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> In >> =20 >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metric= s-07 >> =20 >> I can add RTP in the following way in >> =20 >> =20 >> a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric >> =20 >> * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over= the >>=20 >> period covered by this report. >> =20 >> =20 >> OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's >> comment from his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) >> =20 >> suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: >> =20 >> =20 >>=20 >> Other than a normative reference to =B3discard=B2 the definition >> of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as >> it refers to a sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611. >>=20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> Which of the above option would be preferred? >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> In >> =20 >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-m= etric >> -00 >> =20 >> updated template will be: >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >> * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >> * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes >> discarded over the >> period covered by this report. >> =20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> Cheers, >> =20 >> Varun >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: >> =20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> Hi Alan, >> =20 >> Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new >> version of the draft. >> My DISCUSS is at >> =20 >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-= metri >> cs/ballot/#benoit-claise >> I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into >> account. >> On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not >> specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even >> mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric >> description. >> =20 >> Regards, Benoit >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: New Version Notification - >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt >> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 >> From: >> >> To: >> , >> >> =20 >> >> , >> , >> , >> >> >> =20 >> =20 >> A new version (-07) has been submitted for >> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: >> =20 >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-r= le-me >> trics-07.txt >>=20 >> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Ne= eded >>=20 >>=20 >> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: >> =20 >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-= metri >> cs/ >>=20 >> Diff from previous version: >> =20 >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-= metri >> cs-07 >>=20 >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the >> time of submission >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at >> tools.ietf.org . >>=20 >> IETF Secretariat. >>=20 >> . >>=20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >>=20 >=20 From gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com Mon Oct 28 09:17:14 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831F921E80A9 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:17:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.683 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.683 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.566, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fIsgnFawSk2J for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:17:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AD5211E827B for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:17:07 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7eff8e000000eda-1a-526e8e0229fd Received: from ESESSHC006.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 72.B7.03802.20E8E625; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 17:17:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from [147.214.152.96] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.328.9; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 17:17:06 +0100 Message-ID: <526E8E01.5080709@ericsson.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 17:17:05 +0100 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Clark References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrNLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvjS5TX16QwaXXkhYT3zBbHH0sYTF9 Rz+bxdEPlhYzTnA4sHpM+b2R1ePssqlMHkuW/GTyODb/HKPHl8uf2QJYo7hsUlJzMstSi/Tt Ergytq5PLzhkWLG5aTp7A+M0+S5GTg4JAROJY+s2s0DYYhIX7q1n62Lk4hASOMQo8bN1OZSz hlHi9OGrzCBVvALaElvWv2cEsVkEVCW2zf/EBmKzCVhIbLl1H2ySqECUxIbtF1gg6gUlTs58 AmaLCGhJPO09xgQylFlgG8jQqWDNwgKxEu2zVoLZQgJmEr8eXmIFsTkFzCVedncwQpwnKbHl RTs7iM0soCcx5WoLI4QtL9G8dTYzRK+2xPJnLSwTGIVmIdk9C0nLLCQtCxiZVzGy5yZm5qSX G21iBAb4wS2/VXcw3jkncohRmoNFSZz3w1vnICGB9MSS1OzU1ILUovii0pzU4kOMTBycUg2M u9e8V/euF/4/e9pdhl8XbzQUVM+uuLr6nHiGxbmz7JdV/+fYXrLbtsNSLtp4bleEirzDy59b vy3Z9FD+6cmLHwPdewO69orPSOjaY5+fqml86MuDrGNhZ9+6X8sSiSqf8IFj09cJR/5daF6x 9Mvbuj3Xf3St/T/9hN/Num6+1zF9i2bLcMgGX1FiKc5INNRiLipOBADh/y4hPgIAAA== Cc: Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" , Varun Singh , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:17:14 -0000 Thanks for your quick answer, Alan! Gonzalo On 28/10/2013 5:16 PM, Alan Clark wrote: > Gonzalo > > It is waiting for me - and I'll get it done asap > > Regards > > Alan > > > On 10/28/13 11:57 AM, "Gonzalo Camarillo" > wrote: > >> Alan, Benoit, >> >> what is the status of this? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Gonzalo >> >> On 23/10/2013 4:17 PM, Alan Clark wrote: >>> Hi Benoit >>> >>> My comments related to RFC 6390 compliance for drafts have largely been >>> that RFC 6390 must be applied if the draft defines a metric but does not >>> necessarily need to be applied if the draft simply reports a metric that >>> is defined elsewhere. The objective should be to make sure that there is >>> a single RFC 6390 compliant definition of a metric - sometimes having >>> multiple definitions of the same thing can lead to divergent >>> descriptions and confusion. >>> >>> I¹ll review the rle-metrics draft and send comments today >>> >>> Alan >>> >>> >>> On 10/23/13 10:04 AM, "Benoit Claise" wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hi Varun, >>> >>> I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important. >>> >>> Regards, Benoit >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Benoit, >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> In >>> >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07 >>> >>> I can add RTP in the following way in >>> >>> >>> a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric >>> >>> * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over the >>> >>> period covered by this report. >>> >>> >>> OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's >>> comment from his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) >>> >>> suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: >>> >>> >>> >>> Other than a normative reference to ³discard² the definition >>> of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as >>> it refers to a sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Which of the above option would be preferred? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> In >>> >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metric >>> -00 >>> >>> updated template will be: >>> >>> >>> >>> a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >>> * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >>> * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes >>> discarded over the >>> period covered by this report. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Varun >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Alan, >>> >>> Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new >>> version of the draft. >>> My DISCUSS is at >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metri >>> cs/ballot/#benoit-claise >>> I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into >>> account. >>> On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not >>> specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even >>> mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric >>> description. >>> >>> Regards, Benoit >>> >>> >>> >>> -------- Original Message -------- >>> Subject: New Version Notification - >>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt >>> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 >>> From: >>> >>> To: >>> , >>> >>> >>> >>> , >>> , >>> , >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> A new version (-07) has been submitted for >>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: >>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-me >>> trics-07.txt >>> >>> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed >>> >>> >>> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metri >>> cs/ >>> >>> Diff from previous version: >>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metri >>> cs-07 >>> >>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the >>> time of submission >>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at >>> tools.ietf.org . >>> >>> IETF Secretariat. >>> >>> . >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > From alan.d.clark@telchemy.com Mon Oct 28 12:17:30 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CDCB11E819F for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:17:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LtoKIUOsYg+D for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:17:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omx.cbeyond.com (omx.cbeyond.com [50.20.30.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DA4511E80E7 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:17:24 -0700 (PDT) X-SBRS: None X-HAT: Sender Group ONNET_RELAY, Policy $ACCEPTED applied. X-Hostname: omx06bay.sys.cbeyond.net X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApUBAAO4blJFD9PB/2dsb2JhbAANTIM/Tr5qIYEegxkBAQEDAQEBATkBMQkCDAYBCA0EAwECARUSKAYfCQgBAQQOBQmHbAMJCwMFpQyJTg2Ja4xlgSeBFjMHBgSEIgOJB40XAYMahTOFbocfgVqBVQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,587,1378872000"; d="scan'208";a="71077813" Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.125]) ([69.15.211.193]) by omx.cbeyond.com with ESMTP/TLS/DES-CBC3-SHA; 28 Oct 2013 15:17:17 -0400 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.32.0.111121 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 15:17:13 -0400 From: Alan Clark To: Varun Singh Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt Thread-Index: Ac7T+Q2ruBLvH57qXEmZ1/4q7EmhSwAGUC6J In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org, Gonzalo Camarillo Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:17:30 -0000 Varun We would like to proliferate the use of RFC 6390 and hence, as this draft already has a template then I'd recommend keeping it and updating the wording as you suggested - to include "RTP" in Appendix A in the metric title, name and description Regards Alan >>> Hi Benoit >>>=20 >>> My comments related to RFC 6390 compliance for drafts have largely been >>> that RFC 6390 must be applied if the draft defines a metric but does no= t >>> necessarily need to be applied if the draft simply reports a metric tha= t >>> is defined elsewhere. The objective should be to make sure that there i= s >>> a single RFC 6390 compliant definition of a metric - sometimes having >>> multiple definitions of the same thing can lead to divergent >>> descriptions and confusion. >>>=20 >>> I=B9ll review the rle-metrics draft and send comments today >>>=20 >>> Alan >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 10/23/13 10:04 AM, "Benoit Claise" wrote: >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> Hi Varun, >>> =20 >>> I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important. >>> =20 >>> Regards, Benoit >>> =20 >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> Hi Benoit, >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below: >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> In >>> =20 >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metri= cs-07 >>> =20 >>> I can add RTP in the following way in >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric >>> =20 >>> * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded ove= r the >>>=20 >>> period covered by this report. >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's >>> comment from his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) >>> =20 >>> suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: >>> =20 >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> Other than a normative reference to =B3discard=B2 the definitio= n >>> of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template a= s >>> it refers to a sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> Which of the above option would be preferred? >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> In >>> =20 >>>=20 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metr= i>>> c >>> -00 >>> =20 >>> updated template will be: >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >>> * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >>> * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes >>> discarded over the >>> period covered by this report. >>> =20 >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> Cheers, >>> =20 >>> Varun >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: >>> =20 >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> Hi Alan, >>> =20 >>> Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new >>> version of the draft. >>> My DISCUSS is at >>> =20 >>>=20 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-met= r>>> i >>> cs/ballot/#benoit-claise >>> I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken int= o >>> account. >>> On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not >>> specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even >>> mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric >>> description. >>> =20 >>> Regards, Benoit >>> =20 >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> -------- Original Message -------- >>> Subject: New Version Notification - >>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt >>> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 >>> From: >>> >>> To: >>> , >>> >>> =20 >>> >>> , >>> , >>> , >>> >>> >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> A new version (-07) has been submitted for >>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: >>> =20 >>>=20 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-= m>>> e >>> trics-07.txt >>>=20 >>> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID N= eeded >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: >>> =20 >>>=20 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-met= r>>> i >>> cs/ >>>=20 >>> Diff from previous version: >>> =20 >>>=20 http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-met= r>>> i >>> cs-07 >>>=20 >>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the >>> time of submission >>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at >>> tools.ietf.org . >>>=20 >>> IETF Secretariat. >>>=20 >>> . >>>=20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> =20 >>>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pm-dir mailing list > pm-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir From gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com Mon Oct 28 12:30:35 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B12511E828B for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:30:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.702 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.702 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.547, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j7b7+zmSuguT for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:30:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1788E11E81B1 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:30:25 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7f738e000003ee3-5a-526ebb4a64ad Received: from ESESSHC014.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.183.60]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id BD.AF.16099.A4BBE625; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:30:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from [131.160.126.19] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.62) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.328.9; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:28:38 +0100 Message-ID: <526EBAE2.3080601@ericsson.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:28:34 +0100 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Varun Singh References: <08E50B55-E391-4CDB-B7EC-D5650D0C40BC@comnet.tkk.fi> In-Reply-To: <08E50B55-E391-4CDB-B7EC-D5650D0C40BC@comnet.tkk.fi> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrFLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM2K7ja7X7rwgg/93FSwmvmG2OPpYwmL6 jn42i6MfLC1mnOBwYPWY8nsjq8fZZVOZPJYs+cnkcWz+OUaPL5c/swWwRnHZpKTmZJalFunb JXBlbH+9jbHgomHF1guz2RoYn6h0MXJySAiYSBx518YEYYtJXLi3nq2LkYtDSOAgo8Tu/r8s EM4aRok3RxeAVfEKaEu8WLoMzGYRUJVYsvQmG4jNJmAhseXWfRYQW1QgSmLD9gssEPWCEidn PgGyOThEgOpv/ysEmckssJtR4vyimWA1wgJpEvd/v2EFqRESyJb4vtgCJMwp4CixYdZvqOMk Jba8aGcHsZkFDCSOLJrDCmHLSzRvnc0MYgsBnbb8WQvLBEahWUg2z0LSMgtJywJG5lWM7LmJ mTnp5YabGIHhfXDLb90djKfOiRxilOZgURLn/fDWOUhIID2xJDU7NbUgtSi+qDQntfgQIxMH p1QDI4fVdh3L3GurfSYx71Atvenu1Pqw/5r72/P+jk7LFLZ9d+H/2+endthrylXDNL2cbsOv 3/9zNex89cH+RYjE5A3y21tOi3RePnGOQ9yi9rTLdlP9lBmreKPzDVYF8Ch0TLl8Ke2H6LUP 7WEhR84lTjtbYrw+8gVH1Bavi/+3abqkvnk0P99eTYmlOCPRUIu5qDgRAIYRk4g9AgAA Cc: Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org, Alan Clark Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:30:35 -0000 Thanks! Gonzalo On 28/10/2013 8:20 PM, Varun Singh wrote: > Thanks Alan for the review and the clarification. > I’ll update both the drafts as suggested and submit it on 4th November when the submission reopens. > > Cheers, > Varun > > On 28 Oct 2013, at 21:17, Alan Clark wrote: > >> Varun >> >> We would like to proliferate the use of RFC 6390 and hence, as this draft >> already has a template then I'd recommend keeping it and updating the >> wording as you suggested - to include "RTP" in Appendix A in the metric >> title, name and description >> >> Regards >> >> Alan >> >> >>>>> Hi Benoit >>>>> >>>>> My comments related to RFC 6390 compliance for drafts have largely been >>>>> that RFC 6390 must be applied if the draft defines a metric but does not >>>>> necessarily need to be applied if the draft simply reports a metric that >>>>> is defined elsewhere. The objective should be to make sure that there is >>>>> a single RFC 6390 compliant definition of a metric - sometimes having >>>>> multiple definitions of the same thing can lead to divergent >>>>> descriptions and confusion. >>>>> >>>>> I¹ll review the rle-metrics draft and send comments today >>>>> >>>>> Alan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 10/23/13 10:04 AM, "Benoit Claise" wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Varun, >>>>> >>>>> I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, Benoit >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Benoit, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments below: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In >>>>> >>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07 >>>>> >>>>> I can add RTP in the following way in >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets Metric >>>>> >>>>> * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded over the >>>>> >>>>> period covered by this report. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's >>>>> comment from his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) >>>>> >>>>> suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Other than a normative reference to ³discard² the definition >>>>> of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric template as >>>>> it refers to a sufficiently detailed definition in RFC3611. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Which of the above option would be preferred? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In >>>>> >>>>> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-metri>>> >> c >>>>> -00 >>>>> >>>>> updated template will be: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >>>>> * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >>>>> * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload bytes >>>>> discarded over the >>>>> period covered by this report. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Varun >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Alan, >>>>> >>>>> Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new >>>>> version of the draft. >>>>> My DISCUSS is at >>>>> >>>>> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metr>>> >> i >>>>> cs/ballot/#benoit-claise >>>>> I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken into >>>>> account. >>>>> On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not >>>>> specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't even >>>>> mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric >>>>> description. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, Benoit >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------- Original Message -------- >>>>> Subject: New Version Notification - >>>>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt >>>>> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 >>>>> From: >>>>> >>>>> To: >>>>> , >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> , >>>>> , >>>>> , >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> A new version (-07) has been submitted for >>>>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-m>>> >> e >>>>> trics-07.txt >>>>> >>>>> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: >>>>> >>>>> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metr>>> >> i >>>>> cs/ >>>>> >>>>> Diff from previous version: >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metr>>> >> i >>>>> cs-07 >>>>> >>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the >>>>> time of submission >>>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at >>>>> tools.ietf.org . >>>>> >>>>> IETF Secretariat. >>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pm-dir mailing list >>> pm-dir@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir > From varun@comnet.tkk.fi Mon Oct 28 12:20:18 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pm-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F85F21E80CB for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:20:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id txrlPvTRMpHh for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:20:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-out-01.aalto.fi (smtp-out-01.aalto.fi [130.233.228.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16A8821E8095 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:20:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-out-01.aalto.fi (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Email Security Appliance) with SMTP id 578AA1152ED_26EB8EAB; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:20:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.netlab.hut.fi (luuri.netlab.hut.fi [130.233.154.177]) by smtp-out-01.aalto.fi (Sophos Email Appliance) with ESMTP id E6A2D1152B3_26EB8E9F; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:20:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.netlab.hut.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1DA11E137; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:20:09 +0200 (EET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at luuri.netlab.hut.fi Received: from smtp.netlab.hut.fi ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (luuri.netlab.hut.fi [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id ZQO4Gwq69AfJ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:20:04 +0200 (EET) Received: from [192.168.0.14] (cs181253247.pp.htv.fi [82.181.253.247]) by smtp.netlab.hut.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9A7861E079; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:20:03 +0200 (EET) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C08D54BA-A681-433D-8EBD-EC6DAD983E35"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1816\)) From: Varun Singh In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:20:03 +0200 Message-Id: <08E50B55-E391-4CDB-B7EC-D5650D0C40BC@comnet.tkk.fi> References: To: Alan Clark X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1816) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:11:28 -0700 Cc: Benoit Claise , "pm-dir@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org, Gonzalo Camarillo Subject: Re: [pm-dir] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pm-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics Directorate Discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:20:18 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_C08D54BA-A681-433D-8EBD-EC6DAD983E35 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Thanks Alan for the review and the clarification. I=92ll update both the drafts as suggested and submit it on 4th November = when the submission reopens. Cheers, Varun On 28 Oct 2013, at 21:17, Alan Clark wrote: > Varun >=20 > We would like to proliferate the use of RFC 6390 and hence, as this = draft > already has a template then I'd recommend keeping it and updating the > wording as you suggested - to include "RTP" in Appendix A in the = metric > title, name and description >=20 > Regards >=20 > Alan >=20 >=20 >>>> Hi Benoit >>>>=20 >>>> My comments related to RFC 6390 compliance for drafts have largely = been >>>> that RFC 6390 must be applied if the draft defines a metric but = does not >>>> necessarily need to be applied if the draft simply reports a metric = that >>>> is defined elsewhere. The objective should be to make sure that = there is >>>> a single RFC 6390 compliant definition of a metric - sometimes = having >>>> multiple definitions of the same thing can lead to divergent >>>> descriptions and confusion. >>>>=20 >>>> I=B9ll review the rle-metrics draft and send comments today >>>>=20 >>>> Alan >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On 10/23/13 10:04 AM, "Benoit Claise" wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Hi Varun, >>>>=20 >>>> I believe that the RFC 6390 is actually important. >>>>=20 >>>> Regards, Benoit >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Hi Benoit, >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks for the review and catching the error, comments = below: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> In >>>>=20 >>>> = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-= 07 >>>>=20 >>>> I can add RTP in the following way in >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> a. Run-length encoding (RLE) of Discarded RTP Packets = Metric >>>>=20 >>>> * Metric Description: Instances of RTP packets discarded = over the >>>>=20 >>>> period covered by this report. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> OR, I could remove the RFC6390 template altogether, Alan's >>>> comment from his original PM-DIr review email (July 2013) >>>>=20 >>>> suggested that it was not needed, copy-pasting it below: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Other than a normative reference to =B3discard=B2 the = definition >>>> of this block does not require an RFC6390 metric = template as >>>> it refers to a sufficiently detailed definition in = RFC3611. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Which of the above option would be preferred? >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> In >>>>=20 >>>>=20 > = https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-bytes-discarded-met= ri>>> > c >>>> -00 >>>>=20 >>>> updated template will be: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> a. RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >>>> * Metric Name: RTP Payload Bytes Discarded Metric >>>> * Metric Description: Total number of RTP payload = bytes >>>> discarded over the >>>> period covered by this report. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Cheers, >>>>=20 >>>> Varun >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Oct 23, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Hi Alan, >>>>=20 >>>> Can you please let us know if you're fine with the new >>>> version of the draft. >>>> My DISCUSS is at >>>>=20 >>>>=20 > = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-me= tr>>> > i >>>> cs/ballot/#benoit-claise >>>> I want to make sure that your PM-DIR feedback is taken = into >>>> account. >>>> On my side, I believe that the RFC 6390 template is not >>>> specific enough. For example the metric name doesn't = even >>>> mention it's specific to RTP. Same thing for the metric >>>> description. >>>>=20 >>>> Regards, Benoit >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> -------- Original Message -------- >>>> Subject: New Version Notification - >>>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-07.txt >>>> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:22:41 -0700 >>>> From: >>>> >>>> To: >>>> , >>>> = >>>>=20 >>>> = >>>> , >>>> , >>>> , >>>> >>>> >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> A new version (-07) has been submitted for >>>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 > = http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle= -m>>> > e >>>> trics-07.txt >>>>=20 >>>> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised = ID Needed >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 > = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-me= tr>>> > i >>>> cs/ >>>>=20 >>>> Diff from previous version: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 > = http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-= metr>>> > i >>>> cs-07 >>>>=20 >>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from = the >>>> time of submission >>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at >>>> tools.ietf.org . >>>>=20 >>>> IETF Secretariat. >>>>=20 >>>> . >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> pm-dir mailing list >> pm-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-dir --Apple-Mail=_C08D54BA-A681-433D-8EBD-EC6DAD983E35 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.p7s Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name=smime.p7s Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIMfjCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICAR4wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDE1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDE1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAxIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMcJg8zOLdgasSmkLhOrlr6KMoOMpohBllVHrdRvEg/q6r8jR+EK 75xCGhR8ToREoqe7zM9/UnC6TS2y9UKTpT1v7RSMzR0t6ndl0TWBuUr/UXBhPk+Kmy7bI4yW4urC +y7P3/1/X7U8ocb8VpH/Clt+4iq7nirMcNh6qJR+xjOhV+VHzQMALuGYn5KZmc1NbJQYclsGkDxD z2UbFqE2+6vIZoL+jb9x4Pa5gNf1TwSDkOkikZB1xtB4ZqtXThaABSONdfmv/Z1pua3FYxnCFmdr /+N2JLKutIxMYqQOJebr/f/h5t95m4JgrM3Y/w7YX9d7YAL9jvN4SydHsU6n65cCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRTcu2SnODaywFc fH6WNU7y1LhRgjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBAAqDCH14qywG XLhjjF6uHLkjd02hcdh9hrw+VUsv+q1eeQWB21jWj3kJ96AUlPCoEGZ/ynJNScWy6QMVQjbbMXlt UfO4n4bGGdKo3awPWp61tjAFgraLJgDk+DsSvUD6EowjMTNx25GQgyYJ5RPIzKKR9tQW8gGK+2+R HxkUCTbYFnL6kl8Ch507rUdPPipJ9CgJFws3kDS3gOS5WFMxcjO5DwKfKSETEPrHh7p5shuuNktv sv6hxHTLhiMKX893gxdT3XLS9OKmCv87vkINQcNEcIIoFWbP9HORz9v3vQwR4e3ksLc2JZOAFK+s sS5XMEoznzpihEP0PLc4dCBYjbvSD7kxgDwZ+Aj8Q9PkbvE9sIPP7ON0fz095HdThKjiVJe6vofq +n6b1NBc8XdrQvBmunwxD5nvtTW4vtN6VY7mUCmxsCieuoBJ9OlqmsVWQvifIYf40dJPZkk9YgGT zWLpXDSfLSplbY2LL9C9U0ptvjcDjefLTvqSFc7tw1sEhF0n/qpA2r0GpvkLRDmcSwVyPvmjFBGq Up/pNy8ZuPGQmHwFi2/14+xeSUDG2bwnsYJQG2EdJCB6luQ57GEnTA/yKZSTKI8dDQa8Sd3zfXb1 9mOgSF0bBdXbuKhEpuP9wirslFe6fQ1t5j5R0xi72MZ8ikMu1RQZKCyDbMwazlHiMIIGQjCCBSqg AwIBAgIDB5rPMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRD b20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYG A1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0EwHhcN MTMwOTE5MDA0NzM4WhcNMTQwOTE5MTY1OTUzWjBdMRkwFwYDVQQNExBaNE5WNEZCUXA3bHhzaUk3 MRwwGgYDVQQDDBN2YXJ1bkBjb21uZXQudGtrLmZpMSIwIAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhN2YXJ1bkBjb21u ZXQudGtrLmZpMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAlSUMPU/8sSgO+ak+ZOnP 2TGZTLkLlXJIW1A8VJmgZufjc6d26UsgM8tjC150lFhhoziLA4fG4OTniC1oMtBdXS5RdoQ8qUNq n/rFkWRjiJeY+LYAbtVsEE7U8Sh6EwKgF89RemFkWALkybsT/+wjLa8XozH3FtDlAzZUJvZUxg2r xZxhqBIZ8WNdg1nxT2+SL0r6O9zaAs19WlhF9rg+2xIxMSizrmJD9mDEZBB9BBLOqmKxvZfhLIuW 92VaBw9lRQweM+n0CzQu3IkcLFUaIOaKX6BMcAaWOVlCSAzmT4UwulzvWNBpNEekGHvoBpDsImh+ YZYrDxNQlt9UwKExHQIDAQABo4IC2TCCAtUwCQYDVR0TBAIwADALBgNVHQ8EBAMCBLAwHQYDVR0l BBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQvza5wrE5+jCPPnK9mIV0HdTrRNTAf BgNVHSMEGDAWgBRTcu2SnODaywFcfH6WNU7y1LhRgjAeBgNVHREEFzAVgRN2YXJ1bkBjb21uZXQu dGtrLmZpMIIBTAYDVR0gBIIBQzCCAT8wggE7BgsrBgEEAYG1NwECAzCCASowLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEW Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwgfcGCCsGAQUFBwICMIHqMCcWIFN0 YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MAMCAQEagb5UaGlzIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIHdh cyBpc3N1ZWQgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIHRoZSBDbGFzcyAxIFZhbGlkYXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRz IG9mIHRoZSBTdGFydENvbSBDQSBwb2xpY3ksIHJlbGlhbmNlIG9ubHkgZm9yIHRoZSBpbnRlbmRl ZCBwdXJwb3NlIGluIGNvbXBsaWFuY2Ugb2YgdGhlIHJlbHlpbmcgcGFydHkgb2JsaWdhdGlvbnMu MDYGA1UdHwQvMC0wK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NydHUxLWNybC5jcmww gY4GCCsGAQUFBwEBBIGBMH8wOQYIKwYBBQUHMAGGLWh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9z dWIvY2xhc3MxL2NsaWVudC9jYTBCBggrBgEFBQcwAoY2aHR0cDovL2FpYS5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20v Y2VydHMvc3ViLmNsYXNzMS5jbGllbnQuY2EuY3J0MCMGA1UdEgQcMBqGGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3Rh cnRzc2wuY29tLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAr3gDC5douOybn8cf4VT7lzXO4GlDTQAbsSeX n6qDYs179aAd6gLuWd7CFRSzH7rD+JgOuWorEjTWIQzh5WFxjS0Q5SPxqGVmqMBh24IGlrIKCrIj fP93/qAHyb4cdtCCwSPFjPF4JDsMoAS2+0XXnzdc/ZhpcgmxnWJ7bEfQVagnbCstIH6RRWzWBUMf WjblvA3VvqJaFkOZ4BAodatluDAsRI13rDrVX3cp269tQ2qb6mMHtIAuzMmRbT5cz4E4tvZPGKHo NH2bdUS+h91pTPWqc44HJgPNoWLgxjByHViLdgSg3pqCGoh7zsnGDmhlk99fYjke1xLViC52Wz7G NDGCA28wggNrAgEBMIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEr MCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3Rh cnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAweazzAJBgUrDgMC GgUAoIIBrzAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0xMzEwMjgx OTIwMDNaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBTV+ZoOw0AM1V0F7wwJRL1O+hrsZTCBpQYJKwYBBAGCNxAE MYGXMIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMi U2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xh c3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAweazzCBpwYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsx gZeggZQwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJT ZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFz cyAxIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQIDB5rPMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIB AFofPjB6UPgCltWH0Mb2IXR8nyFMx2owBcUAH1UDSCcEvA9uMj0cFw8H/mF3X8MN5JOhZ+gOf5W1 ed1KdAhW+iS9PTlfUN9t5PXEM2WVcpNNt8FUgotmJsGM3Z8NUVlXDJBOHvVTRKerKCwA3m0H1Plj ro9OqyJQ1AW5m32EJwhCjXIMguo5rBNvRLtzIikueiQ2xLxdZz4SE3bAQN01+/zgOTEG1ou5WetR Tm9YnTmEy0u7lLESfwXpHsuuBaAMYOTYMgLECT6M98pcoTfIEaepCqPJnK27sw2lgmTL/p8kWx2P mYwDHIhSF6XrFdenI5yAvq33MEIV/Am4DmqhAuYAAAAAAAA= --Apple-Mail=_C08D54BA-A681-433D-8EBD-EC6DAD983E35--