Re: [ippm] Update proposal for draf-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes - addingarbitrary data

[Henk Uijterwaal <henk at ripe.net>]

Dear All,

(Personal opinion, not necessarily the opinion of the WG chairs)

> If there is consensus on the fact that the scope can be broadened then we can
> discuss how to extend the schema and the draft.

This seems something that I missed earlier this week.  I was under the
impression that Antonin's extensions filled the XML with information
obtained from traceroute.  After Saverio's comments, I realize that
this information from other sources and thus turns the draft more
into a schema for storing path information.

That is not the scope of this draft.  This draft is to store data
from traceroutes (most likely done to support other metrics).  I
don't particularly like the idea of changing the scope of a draft
that is almost finished.  I'd rather see this draft finished as
it is.  If there is a need for a more generic standard to store
path info, then we need a new draft.  (Which can include the
traceroute stuff).

Other opinions are welcome,

Henk




--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                           Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre          http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk
P.O.Box 10096          Singel 258         Phone: +31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam      1016 AB Amsterdam  Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands        The Netherlands    Mobile: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# Lawyer: "Now sir, I'm sure you are an intelligent and honest man--"
# Witness: "Thank you. If I weren't under oath, I'd return the compliment."



_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm at ietf.org 
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm