[Detnet] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-oam-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-oam-14: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-oam/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

** Section 3.1

      Level - is a 3-bit field.  The Level field is used to cope with
      the "all active path forwarding" characteristics of the PREOF
      concept.  A hierarchical relationship between OAM domains can be
      created using the Level field value.

How are level values constructed in an interoperable way?  How does one know
where a value fits in a hierarchy?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to Hilarie Orman for the SECDIR review.

I support the DISCUSS position of Martin Duke.

** Section 3.1.
      Sequence Number - is an unsigned circular 8-bit field.  The
      sequence number space is circular with no restriction on the
      initial value.

-- is an “unsigned circular … field” an unsigned integer that wraps around?

-- how is wrap-around handled?

** Per the SECDIR review noting these OAM headers could enable tracking or
fingerprinting, it would be valuable to make a statement to that effect in the
Security Considerations.