Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccola-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark
"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com> Sun, 22 December 2019 17:40 UTC
Return-Path: <acm@research.att.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 DF670120018 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 09:40:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.502
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_SUMOF=5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 ELyTUHTkZHX1 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 09:40:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (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 4770412002F for <ippm@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 09:40:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0083689.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0083689.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xBMHZe11025632; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:40:36 -0500
Received: from tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (sbcsmtp3.sbc.com [144.160.112.28]) by m0083689.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2x1f354hda-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:40:36 -0500
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xBMHeZfu009956; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 11:40:35 -0600
Received: from zlp30495.vci.att.com (zlp30495.vci.att.com [135.46.181.158]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xBMHeSBH009844 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 22 Dec 2019 11:40:28 -0600
Received: from zlp30495.vci.att.com (zlp30495.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30495.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id F1CCB4119BD6; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:40:27 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (unknown [135.41.1.46]) by zlp30495.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id CCB804119BBB; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:40:27 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sldc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xBMHeROP008203; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 11:40:27 -0600
Received: from mail-azure.research.att.com (mail-azure.research.att.com [135.207.255.18]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xBMHeN5n007958; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 11:40:23 -0600
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njmtcas1.research.att.com [135.207.255.86]) by mail-azure.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB6AEE5B78; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:39:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from njmtexg5.research.att.com ([fe80::b09c:ff13:4487:78b6]) by njmtcas1.research.att.com ([fe80::e881:676b:51b6:905d%12]) with mapi id 14.03.0468.000; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:40:21 -0500
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com>
To: Tommy Pauly <tpauly=40apple.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccola-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark
Thread-Index: AQHVrs3W59JuMOtz5UuejivcVwH3hKfGb9Dg
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:40:20 +0000
Message-ID: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CFA6F103AF@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <36BC36E1-2BE2-4DF6-8C04-F008B9F01BDC@apple.com>
In-Reply-To: <36BC36E1-2BE2-4DF6-8C04-F008B9F01BDC@apple.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [69.141.203.172]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CFA6F103AFnjmtexg5researc_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,18.0.572 definitions=2019-12-22_03:2019-12-17,2019-12-22 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 mlxlogscore=999 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1011 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1910280000 definitions=main-1912220160
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/8AoFXQAo_Vh50yiveo9J78IBR1s>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccola-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:40:41 -0000
Hi IPPM, I have reviewed the latest draft of multipoint-alt-mark, as well as several earlier versions. I believe the draft is ready for publication, with a few minor comments below. Al multipoint-to-point +------+ ---<> R1 <> +------+ \ \ +------+ <> R4 <> / +------+ \ +------+ / \ +------+ ---<> R2 <> <> R4 <>--- +------+ / +------+ +------+ / <> R5 <> / +------+ +------+ / ---<> R3 <> +------+ I'm fairly sure the Router on the far right is R6 (Figure 1). Also the last sentence of Section 3 reads: While ECMP flow is in scope by definition, since it is a point-to- multipoint unicast flow. There is an issue with two phrases beginning "While" and "since", maybe this was meant, (plus the phrase in italics?): An ECMP flow is in scope by definition, since it is a point-to- multipoint unicast flow, _or/and a point-to-point multipath flow_? Section 4.1 [I-D.amf-ippm-route<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark-03#ref-I-D.amf-ippm-route>] Reference out of date, please use WG version. Section 5 And in case of no packet loss occurring in the marking period, if all the input and output points of the network domain to be monitored are measurement points, the sum of the number of packets on all the ingress interfaces and on all the egress interfaces is the same. Suggest And in case of no packet loss occurring in the marking period, if all the input and output points of the network domain to be monitored are measurement points, the sum of the number of packets on all the ingress interfaces _equals the number on egress interfaces for the _monitored_flow. =========== It is possible to define the Network Packet Loss (for 1 flow, for 1 period): <<In a packet network, the number of lost packets is the number of packets counted by the input nodes minus the number of packets counted by the output nodes>>. Suggest It is possible to define the Network Packet Loss (for 1 _monitored_flow, for 1 period): <<In a packet network, the number of lost packets is the number of packets counted by the input nodes minus the number of packets counted by the output nodes>>. Section 13 You can probably just say, "This memo makes no requests of IANA." From: ippm [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tommy Pauly Sent: Monday, December 9, 2019 3:18 PM To: IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org> Subject: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccola-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark Hello IPPM, Continuing on in our list of Last Calls, we are now beginning the Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark-03<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dippm-2Dmultipoint-2Dalt-2Dmark-2D03&d=DwMFAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=CrcUHiENItugXyVC4F6KnN1f0LEcV3F68vitzlOk-04&s=87YJDmtGd8q5H4GpNd7l5SMz6f5lKU34xddFIRdI7jE&e=> The Last Call will end on Monday, December 23. Please reply to ippm@ietf.org<mailto:ippm@ietf.org> with your reviews, and indicate whether or not you think this document is ready for publication. Best, Tommy (as co-chair)
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-ip… Giuseppe Fioccola
- [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccola-ip… Tommy Pauly
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Giuseppe Fioccola
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Tianran Zhou
- [ippm] R: [EXT] Working Group Last Call: draft-fi… Cociglio Mauro
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Amedeo Sapio
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Bulgarella Fabio (Guest)
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Riccardo Sisto
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Tal Mizrahi
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Nilo Massimo
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Mach Chen
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Dangjuanna
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-fioccol… Giuseppe Fioccola
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-ip… Tommy Pauly
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-ip… Tommy Pauly
- Re: [ippm] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-ip… Giuseppe Fioccola