Revisit system network metrics attributes

[dmitryax]

Context

This issue is a follow-up to https://github.com/open-telemetry/semantic-conventions/pull/89/files#r1299769832. We need to take the opportunity of the attribute renaming required for #51 and choose names that inspire full confidence. The goal is to open a discussion and reach consensus on attribute names that minimize the risk of future changes.

All Network Metrics Attributes (Old Name / Current Name):

• device -> system.device
• direction -> system.network.direction
• protocol -> network.protocol
• state -> system.network.state

We should revisit each of these attributes within the scope of this issue. If you have any ideas or suggestions, please comment. The following are the main concerns we should address:

protocol / network.protocol

We picked network.protocol because it's generic and can be applicable to other metrics. It's listed in https://github.com/open-telemetry/semantic-conventions/blob/main/docs/general/attributes.md#network-attributes. We should rename it to network.protocol.name then.

state / system.network.state

While it currently sounds like a state of the network, in the OTel collector host metrics receiver, it represents connection status (e.g., "CLOSED," "LISTEN," ESTABLISHED," etc.). I think we should rename it to network.connection.status and add it to https://github.com/open-telemetry/semantic-conventions/blob/main/docs/general/attributes.md#network-attributes.

[joaopgrassi]

The other thing that came up was about the system.cpu.logical_number. From @ChrsMark comment on #89:

Don't want to block the merge of this but shouldn't the system.cpu.logical_number be under the host. namespace since it's a resource attribute? So it would be host.cpu.logical_number or host.cpu.id similar to what we have for the host.id?

So if we revisit the attributes, we need to look at this one as well.

[dmitryax]

The other thing that came up was about the system.cpu.logical_number

Thanks. That should go to another cpu related issue

[mx-psi]

I am moving this to blocked since I want to have a clear picture of #394, since I think questions like #330 (comment) may arise here

[mx-psi]

Moving back to Todo, we have treated #394 as a MUST, but it is still unclear and would help if it's resolved to make progress here cc @joaopgrassi

[ChrsMark]

Bumping this up. I see that most of the initial concerns should now be covered:

network.direction

It has been renamed to network.io.direction with values transmit/receive.

system.device

Still system.device.

network.protocol

It has been renamed to network.protocol.name.

system.network.state

Still system.network.state

From the above I only see the system.network.state as possibly pending to change to system.network.status as proposed by @dmitryax at #308. @open-telemetry/semconv-system-approvers what do you think about this?

Otherwise we can consider it as completed.

[ChrsMark]

One question that pops up is if we should use the system.device attribute or just introduce a new one i.e. network.interface.name. This is also related to #1427 (comment) and #1408 (comment).