[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ippm] point 8 of OPS-AD evaluation of draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-05.txt
Dear all
Bert proposes that IANA will assign the ID of futur metrics . I aggree
that this framework looks simpler that the one I propose. Is there any
comment regarding the acceptation of this modification ?
Regards
Emile
---------------------- point 8
---------------------------------------------
>
> 8. I am not sure what section 6.1 is.
> If I understand the word "improbable" correctly, then it means that
> this does not yet exist and will probably never exists. So
> it is an
> example of how new metrics would be added (as per the idea of this
> internet-draft). I think that that method is wrong, because
>
> - it will move the assignments over many documents,
> - therefor it will be more difficult to ensure that there are no
> name clashes/conflicts and that assignments are unique
> - for people who want to use metrics it will be difficult to find
> them.
>
> So I would make it a single IANA maintained MIB module in which the
> IANA can add new assignments.
> If you all do agree, then of course the writeup needs to change.
>
> Each document that creates new Metrics would have an IANA
> considerations
> secrion in which it would request to assign the new metrics. For
> each metric, that document would have (in IANA Considerations sect)
> a statement aka:
>
> IANA has registed the following Metric in the
> IANA-IPPM-METRICS-MIB:
>
> ietfSomeNewMetricName OBJECT-IDENTITY
> STATUS current
> DESCRIPTION "The identifier for the
> Type-P-Some-New_Metric-Name
> metric."
> REFERENCE "RFCxxxx, section n." -- RFC-Editor
> fills in xxxx
> ::= { ietf nn } -- IANA assigns nn
>
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm