[ippm] Re: Request to review draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber

[Rakesh Gandhi <[e-mail]>]

Hello Greg, authors of asymmetrical packets draft,

Could you please advise?

"Conformant Reflected Packet STAMP TLV Flag" defined in
draft-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts-07 can be generalized (and also renamed)
to "Conformant Check" and can be used by all STAMP TLVs for appropriate
similar conditions?
If yes, we can update the BER draft to use the C flag.

Thanks,
Rakesh


On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 10:19 AM Rakesh Gandhi <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Thanks Will for your suggestion.
>
> Let's please confirm with the authors if the "Conformant Reflected Packet
> STAMP TLV Flag" defined in draft-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts-07 can be
> generalized (and also renamed) to "Conformant Check" and can be used by all
> STAMP TLVs for appropriate such conditions.
>
> We can then consider using this flag in the draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber
> draft.
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 6:28 PM Will Hawkins <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> As much as I fancy myself a capable computer user, I failed to
>> navigate the To: correctly on my last email.
>>
>> I am (for real this time) adding Greg explicitly for his expertise.
>> Sorry for the additional email noise.
>>
>> Will
>>
>> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 4:30 PM Will Hawkins <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >
>> > +Greg explicitly for his expertise on the discussion!
>> >
>> > For context, Rakesh and I had a discussion off-list about this topic
>> > and he encouraged me to email the list. I hope that the discussion
>> > will be useful to everyone.
>> >
>> > While doing an initial read of this excellent draft, I noticed
>> >
>> > "Editor's Note: We could define a new TLV Flag "Non-consistent
>> > message" for handling this condition."
>> >
>> > It made me think that the BER TLV is a great example of how a generic
>> > Conformance TLV flag (like the one proposed specifically for use in
>> > the "Asymmetry" RFC
>> > (
>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts-07.html#name-conformant-reflected-packet
>> ))
>> > could be useful. Before opting to narrow the scope of applicability to
>> > just the Reflected Test Packet TLV, I had suggested a Conformance TLV
>> > flag as a generic tool for authors of individual TLV RFCs to use if
>> > they needed a means for a Reflector to indicate to a Sender that some
>> > part of the requested measurement/behavior could not be completed.
>> >
>> > I imagined the Conformance TLV Flag being defined with IANA in generic
>> > terms that would put the onus on authors of TLV RFCs to define the
>> > exact semantics if they wanted to use it.
>> >
>> > It seemed like "Asymmetry" would be a good first place to use it and
>> > now it seems like it might be useful here, too!
>> >
>> > I hope that this brainstorm helps!
>> > Will
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 5:29 PM Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)
>> > <rgandhi=[e-mail]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi IPPM WG,
>> > >
>> > > We have introduced a new draft on using STAMP for Bit Error Detection.
>> > >
>> > > We would greatly appreciate your thoughts and any suggestions you may
>> have.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Rakesh (for authors)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
>> > > Date: Wednesday, April 16, 2025 at 2:47 PM
>> > > To: Peter Schoenmaker <[e-mail]>, Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi) <
>> [e-mail]>
>> > > Subject: New Version Notification for
>> draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-00.txt
>> > >
>> > > A new version of Internet-Draft draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-00.txt
>> has been
>> > > successfully submitted by Rakesh Gandhi and posted to the
>> > > IETF repository.
>> > >
>> > > Name:     draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber
>> > > Revision: 00
>> > > Title:    Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP)
>> Extensions for Bit Error Detection and Bit Error Rate Measurement
>> > > Date:     2025-04-16
>> > > Group:    Individual Submission
>> > > Pages:    10
>> > > URL:
>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-00.txt
>> > > Status:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber/
>> > > HTMLized:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Abstract:
>> > >
>> > >    The Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP), as defined
>> in
>> > >    RFC 8762, along with its optional extensions specified in RFC 8972,
>> > >    can be utilized for active measurement.  This document further
>> > >    augments the STAMP extensions specified in RFC 8972 to enable the
>> > >    detection of bit errors and the measurement of the bit error rate
>> > >    (BER) within the "Extra Padding Data" of STAMP packets.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > The IETF Secretariat
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > ippm mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> > > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ippm mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>
>