IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ippm] New Draft draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm

Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> Tue, 24 July 2018 03:31 UTC

Return-Path: <mach.chen@huawei.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 E0A50130FCE; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 20:31:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xyBMghVLw9r3; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 20:31:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2ECEB130FD0; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 20:31:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id B5ED2270760E4; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 04:31:43 +0100 (IST)
Received: from DGGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.39) by lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.399.0; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 04:31:44 +0100
Received: from DGGEML510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.219]) by DGGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::b177:a243:7a69:5ab8%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:31:39 +0800
From: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
To: "Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
CC: "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>, spring <spring@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: New Draft draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm
Thread-Index: AQHUHdYWIyzVjAdRVki/QCU1ZO1Y+aSdv1EA
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 03:31:38 +0000
Message-ID: <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE29254C085@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <92ED16BE-ACDF-4901-91B5-BC39A744C2F1@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <92ED16BE-ACDF-4901-91B5-BC39A744C2F1@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.194.201]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE29254C085dggeml510mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/06oREuqHmWPuaF2R4ZQx0MyEt4E>
Subject: Re: [ippm] New Draft draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 03:31:51 -0000

Hi Authors,

The draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm-01 defines a new C flag as following:

3.1.2.1.  Loss Measurement Flags

   An LM message carries Data Format Flags (DFlags) as defined in
   [RFC6374].  New Flag is defined in this document for Color (C) in the
   DFlags field as follows.

                              +-+-+-+-+
                              |X|B|C|0|
                              +-+-+-+-+

                          Data Format Flags

   The Flag C indicates the Color of the counters in the LM probe
   message [RFC6374] when using Alternate-Marking method defined in
   [RFC8321].
-------------

As defined in Section 4.2 of [RFC8321], could you consider to define more than one flag or a TLV to carry Block number instead?

Best regards,
Mach

From: ippm [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 9:57 PM
To: ippm@ietf.org
Subject: [ippm] New Draft draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm

Hi WG,

We like to introduce following new draft that was presented to SPRING WG yesterday.

This draft defines IP/UDP path for sending probe query messages for delay and loss measurement that is agnostics to data plane (SR-MPLS/SRv6/IP) and does not require to bootstrap PM session.


https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm/

You may find presentation in the following package (it is the second draft).

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-spring-13-performance-measurement-in-sr-networks-00

We welcome your comments and suggestions.

Thanks,
Rakesh (On behalf of authors and contributors)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email