Subject: [sfc] #4 (architecture): Reuse the IPFIX registry for identifying context types

From: "sfc issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 06:22:46 -0000

#4: Reuse the IPFIX registry for identifying context types

 Given IPFIX defines a large set of attributes
 (https://www.ietf.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xml), wouldn't be optimal to
 reuse that registery for SFC purposes?

-- 
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:                           |      Owner:  draft-ietf-sfc-
  [email-masked]       |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                   |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major                    |  Milestone:
Component:  architecture             |    Version:
 Severity:  -                        |   Keywords:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sfc/trac/ticket/4>
sfc <http://tools.ietf.org/sfc/>

---

From: "sfc issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 06:24:42 -0000

Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * owner:  [email-masked] => draft-ietf-sfc-
     [email-masked]
 * component:  architecture => nsh

-- 
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:                           |       Owner:  draft-ietf-sfc-
  [email-masked]       |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                   |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major                    |   Milestone:
Component:  nsh                      |     Version:
 Severity:  -                        |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                           |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sfc/trac/ticket/4#comment:1>
sfc <http://tools.ietf.org/sfc/>

---

From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 10:38:38 -0400

And this is also an NSH issue, not an architecture issue.

As an NSH issue, I have serious concerns with this proposed reuse.  The 
two lists of things which need to be identified and the way such 
information is to be used are quite different, although they have a 
small overlap.  Efforts to reuse other registries in the presence of 
small overlap have proven problematic.

Yours,
Joel