[ippm] draft-he-ippm-ioam-dex-extensions-incorporating-am-00 and draft-he-ippm-ioam-extensions-incorporating-am-02
Xiaoming He <xiaoming-he@foxmail.com> Wed, 27 November 2024 03:38 UTC
Return-Path: <xiaoming-he@foxmail.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD761C1D4A8D for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Nov 2024 19:38:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.833
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.833 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, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.001, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=1.951, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=foxmail.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 XQ2e1unxXKEw for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Nov 2024 19:38:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out203-205-221-202.mail.qq.com (out203-205-221-202.mail.qq.com [203.205.221.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6EBFC1D4A85 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Nov 2024 19:38:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=foxmail.com; s=s201512; t=1732678679; bh=M3PP8S/uuxSMRRwRutKxt7mZUZjkicmfgdBYodBltSY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date; b=nSqchSmreXvhIzrz6k+/Zonog2Lh+VXpm5RUraNugbC1gKoKmN8w07UsPgmdetqLt olFn9rJ35ML8SJg+SSawH0RCjk4A+Yd4Zb8Ks9/HO4scNxC8MAVfYs9yNWzN3bCXeU jQGFGoQ1dLA3yS1f8GHK2BN8pbXzzib+184YxPCI=
X-QQ-XMRINFO: MYTJVxP1dBxwZFBmm3GDYp0=
X-QQ-XMAILINFO: MufXY8E5t2cFnrzEVxmRg7kWjUbbPnfL4brozeL7i8bG4EjQoUcDa4do7NvXrM BBVjqkJqK8EOHKovzgqqQ821X7t7yUhVyhBzBO8UfBGmsgxkKTmSHJmcfuG94uWWHPgddo5I/xaYb vVnrm+cmuaF9DzMKOlcDoA1jJLN8Sc4eKtWkPg1/BTh8Ym9tj7ElnNv0eCOuVy4w567xs6oBfMZmi xMtB8kemeShB2ADG7ou8A1fGX0eNnutw5FlC8tRc2+9RKIMynuF7x28P/AIyNPg2U2sTcs0oEmQ+h 9LC3QVxc/+Kh+9Tl4BrD3JiCMM2LoThFI0w7EuCVAXAG/I8KNXZle7n+UaalSxHitwSqN7SK0o8WE 1h/Zbj34DRkEognDVOGUljWqV99teRJ/8SdV+lJbUp8rJ9Toy0fh5G3gBkPd+WkfHOT4WTXbWDq58 zwVHMrZJi17gewrrkfqMozQt0lmw0mzm7aV/85V0CpfwWxRJs76Zbae8eDsa/Dl1FD1ggYmSRQ8fg OvsHe3+fk2BTs1xwYoSTV/z8a+R6gne421SGvUbOq6qbyYKhllyBNXMyesKgWHMyG9IAolphrtQ1e UEhrJ0dUZWktJ1mioebsOQ5M2xerh+x4GCO6ArKAP7miq/IuM3oIGNo8jL6H6fF8Fc23eI2DPfJce nQf/T8tBGpA+UxiEKuOS3UICGKJnM0COTF6AyyL8eX+k7oMLAJGziBZQHJdBrGqZFHH7S75sx6IaC fuqHJeWq7wcdiYGJDt3AB6rdzfm3q2gyl3eT++VYxSALQd6MrmhHdoG3Cr7otMW2RVdZtEKX1TEau S+7Drlg4+4N5xyqrhdFkWwGt5qPxyk+W0XcClnhzoQespjX7y7R/TvKEvdzbeZ3+kKCq6dBOCHlhg l0oiBQBWCcGGJ7TxtnXekWR/7iRi+OidCqnt4GwmDXpeInrRgejC/3dSZMzTnvCod/p4H1Ndjc/AR qabgsn7vbtLg0cOeJNrNKBciI+Hjw=
From: Xiaoming He <xiaoming-he@foxmail.com>
To: ippm <ippm@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_67469417_3DA28FC0_1195C852"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 11:37:59 +0800
X-Priority: 3
Message-ID: <tencent_FEAC23F38F03E8F63D1B26B32E215918E808@qq.com>
X-QQ-MIME: TCMime 1.0 by Tencent
X-Mailer: QQMail 2.x
X-QQ-Mailer: QQMail 2.x
X-QQ-mid: xmsezb26-0t1732678679tnnibroab
Message-ID-Hash: OOTLNKZUCOIIR2URYHB22VUYEZST2N7B
X-Message-ID-Hash: OOTLNKZUCOIIR2URYHB22VUYEZST2N7B
X-MailFrom: xiaoming-he@foxmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ippm.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [ippm] draft-he-ippm-ioam-dex-extensions-incorporating-am-00 and draft-he-ippm-ioam-extensions-incorporating-am-02
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/-zC7s5t0usHxP04UvQxlSjw_UQE>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ippm-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ippm-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ippm-leave@ietf.org>
Dear IPPM WG, We had no time to give the lightning talks for the two similar drafts: draft-he-ippm-ioam-dex-extensions-incorporating-am-00 and draft-he-ippm-ioam-extensions-incorporating-am-02, at the IETF 121 meeting. The main motivations and objectives for the two drafts are to augment IOAM's capabilities (RFC9197) in performance measurement aspects by incorporating the Alternate-Marking Method. Also, they can augment AltMark (RFC9343) by defining optional Flow ID, SN, and MPN fields. The benefits obtained are as follows: 1. Only unique packet header encapsulation format is used for both IOAM trace monitoring and performance measurement such as packet loss, delay and jitter, thus simplifying the complexity of forwarding chips. 2. By using 32 bits for Flow ID, which may be flexibly divided into two sub-fields: NodeID (assigned uniquely in measurement domain) and FlowMonID (assigned randomly and uniquely in a deviceļ¼, so it may be easily deployed in distributed way in case of central controller unavailable. 3. By using MPN field, it is more simpler for an analyzer or collector to correlate loss measurement data belonging to the same measurement period from different nodes, especially in the case of milliseconds-level measurement block. 4. By using SN and MPN fields, multiple timestamps in different packets from different nodes belonging to the same measurement block can be identified in case of packets out of order, and it also can be used to identify which double-marked packet is lost. Compared to selecting a single double-marked packet for each batch, which may lead to a invalid delay result if this double-marked packet is lost, selecting multiple double-marked packets for each measurement batch provides a robust and accurate method for packet delay measurement. The slides for the drafts provide a very brief summary and can be found at the link below: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/121/session/ippm. Any comments and suggestions are welcome. Best Regards, Xiaoming