Re: [Ioam] [ippm] IOAM in IPPM

Thanks Nalini. Looking forward to the IOAM work in IPPM. Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Ioam [mailto:ioam-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com
Sent: Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2017 20:15
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <fbrockne@cisco.com>; ippm@ietf.org
Cc: Robert Hamilton <rhamilton@cas.org>; ioam@ietf.org; Michael Ackermann <mackermann@bcbsm.com>
Subject: Re: [Ioam] [ippm] IOAM in IPPM

Frank,

As one of the authors of the PDM draft (draft-ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option) that you discussed below.  I find your work extremely interesting, as you know!

I hope to see your work in IPPM.  I can see that we may be able to collaborate and do quite interesting work in the future.
 Thanks,

Nalini Elkins
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
(831) 659-8360

----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <fbrockne@cisco.com>
To: "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Cc: "ioam@ietf.org" <ioam@ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 9:06 AM
Subject: [ippm] IOAM in IPPM

Dear IPPM WG,

following the recommendation from the IPPM chairs (see also Brian's email below) as well as ADs involved (see also Alvaro's email below) the discussions on in-situ OAM (IOAM), we'd like the IPPM WG to consider adopting the IOAM work, especially the definition of formats and associated procedures for in-situ OAM, including mechanisms for capturing path and path-traversal related information as well as procedures to employ, configure, trigger, and export the embedded telemetry information. For this we'd suggest to adopt https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-brockners-inband-oam-data-02 as a starting point for the work of IPPM on IOAM. Like Brian noted, IPPM WG already focusses on hybrid measurements (e.g. those enabled by the similar draft-ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option), hence IOAM would be a natural complement and addition to that work and would benefit from all earlier work on metrics etc. 

Background on In-situ OAM: In-situ OAM provides real-time telemetry of individual data packets and flows. It is based on telemetry information which is embedded within live user traffic, where "live user traffic" means packets originated and terminated at the application layer. For more information on in-situ OAM, you could refer to the requirements draft we posted (draft-brockners-inband-oam-requirements-02), or check out the presentations we gave at IETF 96 and 97: https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/slides/slides-96-opsawg-8.pdf and https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-opsawg-in-situ-oam-00.PDF 

Appreciate your thoughts and support :-).

Thanks, Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Trammell (IETF) [mailto:ietf@trammell.ch] 
Sent: Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2017 16:13
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <fbrockne@cisco.com>
Subject: IOAM in IPPM

Hi, Frank,

As we discussed today, please do introduce your draft (draft-brockners-inband-oam-data-00) to the IPPM mailing list. Given our recent focus on hybrid measurements (e.g. those enabled by the similar draft-ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option), I'd like to start a discussion there about considering the draft for adoption within IPPM.

Thanks, cheers,

Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: Ioam [mailto:ioam-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alvaro Retana (aretana)
Sent: Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2017 17:58
To: ioam@ietf.org
Subject: [Ioam] IOAM Work Moving Forward

Hi!

First of all, thank you all for the interest expressed in this topic and the discussions about the charter.

As you know, one of the discussions resulting from the Internal Review of the proposed IOAM charter was whether the work was already within the ippm WG scope or not.  Over the last couple of days, I have dug deeper into that question with the Transport ADs and the ippm WG Chairs, and our conclusion is that there is significant overlap between the current ippm Charter and the proposed IOAM work.  Enough to justify moving the work forward in the ippm WG and not splintering a related effort into a new WG.

I have then stopped the chartering effort for a new WG.  The proponents will start discussions on the ippm list soon - please join if you're not there already.  I will keep this list open for a couple more days.

Clearly there is interest in developing this cross-area work in the IETF.  I hope that you will continue to participate as the topic progresses on the ippm WG.  It is important that this type of cross-area efforts be properly discussed and that we don't create more silos.  I realize it took us a couple of tries to find what I think is a stable home for the IOAM work - I know that the open discussion has only helped the overall process.

Thanks!

Alvaro.
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm