[ippm] Re: Call for adoption: draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07 (Ends 2026-10-12)

[李振强 <[e-mail]>]

Hello All,

I have reviewed this draft and support its adoption. It presents a potential use case that leverages the STAMP extension mechanism.


Best Regards,
Zhenqiang Li
China Mobile

----邮件原文----
发件人：Thomas Graf via Datatracker 
收件人：ippm ,ippm-chairs ,draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber 
抄　送: (无)
发送时间：2026-09-28 16:44:44
主题：[ippm] Call for adoption: draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07 (Ends 2026-10-12)

This message starts a ippm WG Call for Adoption of:
draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07

This Working Group Call for Adoption ends on 2026-10-12

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. Networks may experience
 transmission bit errors due to various factors, including poor fiber
 quality. Even with efficient CRC and FEC mechanisms, some bit errors
 may escape detection and correction, referred to as residual bit
 errors. This document further augments the STAMP extensions
 specified in RFC 8972 to enable the measurement of the residual bit
 error rate within the "Extra Padding" TLV of STAMP test packets.

Slides from IETF 126 IPPM/BMWG session:
 https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/126/materials/slides-126-ippm-simple-two-way-active-measurement-protocol-stamp-extensions-for-residual-bit-error-rate-measurement-draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber

Please reply to this message and indicate whether or not you support adoption
of this Internet-Draft by the ippm WG. Comments to explain your preference
are greatly appreciated. Please reply to all recipients of this message and
include this message in your response.

Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual
Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2].
Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions
of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any.
Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be
found at [3].

Thank you.
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/

The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber/

There is also an HTMLized version available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list -- [e-mail]
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

Subject：[ippm] Call for adoption: draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07 (Ends 2026-10-12)

This message starts a ippm WG Call for Adoption of:
draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07

This Working Group Call for Adoption ends on 2026-10-12

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. Networks may experience
 transmission bit errors due to various factors, including poor fiber
 quality. Even with efficient CRC and FEC mechanisms, some bit errors
 may escape detection and correction, referred to as residual bit
 errors. This document further augments the STAMP extensions
 specified in RFC 8972 to enable the measurement of the residual bit
 error rate within the "Extra Padding" TLV of STAMP test packets.

Slides from IETF 126 IPPM/BMWG session:
 https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/126/materials/slides-126-ippm-simple-two-way-active-measurement-protocol-stamp-extensions-for-residual-bit-error-rate-measurement-draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber

Please reply to this message and indicate whether or not you support adoption
of this Internet-Draft by the ippm WG. Comments to explain your preference
are greatly appreciated. Please reply to all recipients of this message and
include this message in your response.

Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual
Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2].
Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions
of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any.
Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be
found at [3].

Thank you.
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/

The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber/

There is also an HTMLized version available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-07
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list -- [e-mail]
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]