Re: [Detnet] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-detnet-ip-oam-12

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Wed, 14 February 2024 20:11 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A6D4C15155A; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:11:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LHrsbIsvKAVl; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:11:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw1-x112b.google.com (mail-yw1-x112b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::112b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F36FC151084; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:10:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw1-x112b.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-607a84acf6aso1496187b3.2; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:10:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1707941455; x=1708546255; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=gBAlCK5k49wtf+afOtSrluo+dNFIMJswsbNQ6PAFczA=; b=RRKZVdEB9i/B//D0UC2hHmrP207l/zMU9mq8y0NDiFbqMXgEKIDX9NR1C4FYIJO7a2 1ZKoinc0l96ftJPyzJM1gKdjOG0r3/35+OFoWXiJdg3dCGLMPnU6dZo5ccG8ZuIz7gFY 7zBKvWdgFPDto3Tv+mV+Wf6BRv9Db+LpA4ttu2a0IKQCBNPOHL/j7jFl38lKscM7uukV CTJE/LWz3D4prPwOunh70wC51rk/qNXWLL8YggTu7Sil2nImBDsu2eqFojrWhJYMAizW lCKRYgbZ9H/WIkKXr9lf7phqLXa4WaYDDHCgKFRJyoZ56u3xYMlPZm9bE7X48XD+Q/tI TSAQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1707941455; x=1708546255; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=gBAlCK5k49wtf+afOtSrluo+dNFIMJswsbNQ6PAFczA=; b=hCj19fAV6rD5FduWdiAmWYL/mGr8pBNdDPqAAvRAC5I7wonmC7DqlTbXKTKZwXkmQR p7f4Qpjqwv2FSSLFCys8S7ToYjV+9WVvlF3gV0OFQMeLzE15D9Rv8CmVeKLuTQXB2cMV s+M8d3pjX+yfnaDd05jl3rQQ1EcPZB4GlzUEphP7hxQa6WPg96JtU09Q84XlT5jA2SV0 vshGmW3Cd7dgSypgLuXFNQ3LgqBfbVCw279kwuLjmHzrKKfqVLn4MQhXGOxmK0kC+AFG zSmKdcqPOCGYJxQplNDtQckH9ln9SCt5ypqxHqDG3uKccwbJCCwEj+8eZwJm5jjtZcvE n6Lg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUR3aC46vvfTHrsdyLn4VAf+1b33iavH28rlMpzSJ8i8OKBawrS4w6Uc1s1DaAXQwT11pgRtwE3ZYgDaFXPUjdUH98wXFF6UZdGXCe+A/GwjJ5+Zv2EZbKTnpJ+JPTSH0UBw0OUx1ARXB6iNZr3W6hkcPUyZet9GA/amQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy+bzrkbRyr1mxW8RgKu0aYg0ZSnhKbaROnaixrpXDKhFLJdhlp iQkQINN7nMslRaWAQq2FPXQ7kPwEGHGjsS/OZp0RFjujLr0Wiy3EqPxxIwmZnC7V5S6JCVChSBQ 6f8xNvkm0NzfNlEGuvKeTZGd2qIq4pGTy
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE3zxcjm9cjzkZ8vgvvxXKlWnHI5ahn+fN2/WBoojJ2XJh64ttpUocMN6A4AmC6jYH6ipvN7/cV2/xjL8KvWHk=
X-Received: by 2002:a81:85c1:0:b0:604:ec5c:2ce0 with SMTP id v184-20020a8185c1000000b00604ec5c2ce0mr3422952ywf.48.1707941455402; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:10:55 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <170788374355.55771.11998499550968611871@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+RyBmWN-RJ62xNJR8oZ5fF8NGJ773fRhbtFDo5R8eY2+KknjQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABY-gOOZ2di1_JoMDKYesw+dte_Fh1f3KWxpSkudYtc8uLHq4Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABY-gOOZ2di1_JoMDKYesw+dte_Fh1f3KWxpSkudYtc8uLHq4Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:10:44 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXzasXROhvy-R_ZiNTXVv6hJy8yvF+KdfqJ3=6YiEspcQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org, detnet@ietf.org, draft-ietf-detnet-ip-oam.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="000000000000bf891706115d1bf0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/dTq01BwRx7t_C0DFBBCGV2TJxg8>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-detnet-ip-oam-12
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <detnet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 20:11:41 -0000

Hi Yingzhen,
thank you for your thoughtful suggestions that helped alot in improving the
document. I like shorter sentences; they make text clearer. Both text
updates accepted and are in the working version (attached).

Best regards,
Greg

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 8:39 AM Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
> Thanks for the reply. Please see my answers below inline.
>
> Thanks,
> Yingzhen
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 9:48 PM Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Yingzhen,
>> thank you for your kind words in support of this work; much appreciated.
>> Please find my notes below tagged GIM>>.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Greg
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 8:09 PM Yingzhen Qu via Datatracker <
>> noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Reviewer: Yingzhen Qu
>>> Review result: Ready
>>>
>>> I've reviewed version 10, and this is a follow up review.
>>>
>>> Thanks to the authors for working on this document and addressing my
>>> comments.
>>>
>>> The document readability has improved a lot from my last review of
>>> version -10,
>>> and I believe it is ready for publication.
>>>
>>> There are a couple of nits for the authors to consider.
>>>
>>> The line numbers are generated using idnits.
>>>
>>> 160        is being done by using the Internet Control Message Protocol
>>> (ICMP)
>>>
>>> nits: there should be a "." in the end.
>>>
>> GIM>> It seems like the long sentence may confuse a reader:
>>    Most of on-demand failure detection and localization in IP networks
>>    is being done by using the Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP)
>>    Echo Request, Echo Reply and the set of defined error messages, e.g.,
>>    Destination Unreachable, with the more detailed information provided
>>    through code points.
>> The intention is to note that Echo Request/Reply that are the mechanism
>> used in ICMP are the common method for on-demand failure detection and
>> localization, i.e., of ping and traceroute. Would a slight re-wording make
>> it clearer:
>> NEW TEXT:
>>    Most of on-demand failure detection and localization in IP networks
>>    is being done by using the Internet Control Message Protocol's (ICMP)
>>    Echo Request, Echo Reply, and the set of defined error messages, e.g.,
>>    Destination Unreachable, with the more detailed information provided
>>    through code points.
>> WDYT?
>>
>
> [Yingzhen]: Now I see I did break the long sentence wrong. Fortunately the
> message of the sentence was still delivered correctly. Here is my
> suggestion:
> In IP networks, the majority of on-demand failure detection and
> localization is achieved through the use of the Internet Control Message
> Protocol (ICMP), utilizing Echo Request and Echo Reply messages, along with
> a set of defined error messages such as Destination Unreachable, which
> provide detailed information through assigned code points.
>
>
>>> 166        traffic between DetNet nodes with IP DetNet traffic, e.g.,
>>> ensure
>>> 167        that such ICMP traffic uses the DetNet IP data plane in each
>>> node,
>>>
>>> nits: somehow this sentence doesn't read well to me. "uses the DetNet IP
>>> data plane" is not very clear to me, I think you're trying to say ICMP
>>> traffic
>>> should go through the same path/interface as DetNet traffic, for example,
>>> there is ECMP between two DetNet nodes.
>>>
>> GIM>> Thank you for pointing this to me. You are correct, the intention
>> is to stress the importance of ensuring that ICMP packets traverse the same
>> set of nodes and interfaces and receieve the same QoS treatment as the
>> monitored DetNet IP flow. I propose the following update:
>> OLD TEXT:
>>    In order to use ICMP for these
>>    purposes with DetNet, DetNet nodes must be able to associate ICMP
>>    traffic between DetNet nodes with IP DetNet traffic, e.g., ensure
>>    that such ICMP traffic uses the DetNet IP data plane in each node,
>>    otherwise ICMP may be unable to detect and localize failures that are
>>    specific to the DetNet IP data plane.
>>  NEW TEXT:
>>    In order to use ICMP
>>    for these purposes with DetNet, DetNet nodes must be able to
>>    associate ICMP traffic between DetNet nodes with IP DetNet traffic,
>>    i.e., ensure that such ICMP traffic traverses the same interfaces and
>>    receives the same QoS treatment as the monitored DetNet IP flow;
>>    otherwise, ICMP may be unable to detect and localize failures that
>>    are specific to the DetNet IP data plane.
>> What are your thoughts? Is the text more clear now?
>>
>
> [Yingzhen]:  The new text is definitely more clear. Here is my suggestion,
> and it's up to you to decide whether to use it or not.
> To utilize ICMP effectively for these purposes within DetNet, DetNet nodes
> must establish the association of ICMP traffic between DetNet nodes with IP
> DetNet traffic. This entails ensuring that such ICMP traffic traverses the
> same interfaces and receives identical QoS treatment as the monitored
> DetNet IP flow. Failure to do so may result in ICMP being unable to detect
> and localize failures specific to the DetNet IP data plane.
>