[ris-int] Re: We need your fb again ;)
Emma Bretherick emma at ripe.net
Mon Jul 19 12:41:01 CEST 2004
Hey, We still prefer our last suggestions: Error Time Limit Error Event Count We think they make a little more sense - at least to us! However in case you hate them, out of your suggestions we prefer: 'Min-Event-Duration' and 'Min-Event-Count' Ta muchly (and sorry for the delay in replying!) Cheers, Emma At 14:11 06/07/2004 +0200, Matthew Williams wrote: >Hi Comms, > >Please see explanations here: http://www.ripe.net/ris/myasngls.html#50 > >And then think about alternative terms for below: > >*Hold Down Time >*Hold Down Event: > >'Min-Event-Duration' and 'Min-Event-Count' are our current candidates. > >*Time To Live: > >We have two lines of thought here. One relates to 'detection' of events >building up to an alarm entry in the email sent to the user, >while the other follows the line of 'suppression' of further entries once >the first entry has been triggered (based on exactly the >same events). If we go along with the second concept, then this is a >maximum time interval. In the first case, we're talking about a >fixed 'window' (time interval). I hope all that made sense ;) > >Here come some suggestions: "Event-count Window", "Alarm-Suppress-Time", >"Max-suppress-time", "Event-Suppress-Time', >"max-detect-window", "alarm-detect-window"... Etc etc... We could go on >forever and ever. The question is: What works for you? > >The beta is more or less ready so we need to get this one out of the way >once and for all... ;) > >Cheers, >Matthew > > --- > > Matthew Williams (MW243-RIPE) > > Customer Liaison Engineer > > RIPE NCC - http://www.ripe.net/np/ ------------------------------------ Emma Bretherick RIPE NCC http://www.ripe.net/
[ Ris-int Archives ]