1. Traceroute Storage Format and Metrics draft-niccolini-ippm-storetraceroutes-03 Saverio Niccolini, Sandra Tartarelli, Juergen Quittek Network Laboratories, NEC Europe Ltd. {niccolini|tartarelli|quittek}@netlab.nec.de Martin Swany University of Delaware, Newark swany@udel.edu

2. © NEC Corporation 20052 Parallel Activities at IETF and GGF The Global Grid Forum (GGF) Network Measurement Working Group (NM-WG) is currently performing similar work Meeting with GGF editor Martin Swany in January There is no formal way for doing so –IETF and GGF do not exchange or share standards Suggestion –go on with separate standardization at both bodies –but harmonize activities by the document editors –risk: late changes in the individual bodies’ standardization process might lead to (hopefully minor) inconsistencies

3. © NEC Corporation 20053 Harmonization of IETF and GGF Activities Use the same information model and data model –common XML schema for traceroute data Use IPPM information elements –semantics and naming consistent with RFC 2925 Use GGF data organization –separate meta-data from measured data –clean way of reporting measurement parameters once for many measurements But use different descriptive text in IETF and GGF documents –unavoidable because of different formal document constraints

4. © NEC Corporation 20054 State of current draft version -03 First version with merged XML schema Schema almost done Some more re-fitting of the text required Only minor issues left to be fixed

5. © NEC Corporation 20055 Open Technical Issues Check metadata/data separation in the traceRoute element –become more flexible by supporting different combinations of data and meta-data update element traceRouteResultsProbeRoundTripTime? –Value is 0 if delay is less than 1 ms if the host was not reachable? –What would be a better encoding? Specify more precisely the OS versions covered in section 2? –currently we have “Unix, Linux, Windows” Consider adding an MPLS label and AS number as potential probe results Align with revision of RFC 2925 (just approved by IESG)

6. © NEC Corporation 20056 Open Editorial Issues Consider updating the title and the text of the draft –the actual schema can be used not only to store traceroute measurements but also to request/configure a measurement. Explicitly state consistency with RFC 2925 (or revision) Consider rewriting the description for ResultsProbeHopIndex, right now it is written in pure SNMP language and might be not clear. Consider improving section on metrics considerations. Consider improving section on security considerations. Complete IANA considerations. Separate normative and informational references.

7. © NEC Corporation 20057 Next Steps at IETF and GGF next Internet draft version in April/May expected to be ready for WG last call post as WG document? –IPPM charter says “submit to IESG” in June 2006 GGF roadmap not clear –to be investigated by GGF document editor