Re: [ippm] draft-weis-ippm-ioam-gre-00 -> draft-weis-ippm-ioam-eth-00

Haoyu song <haoyu.song@huawei.com> Mon, 29 October 2018 19:06 UTC

Return-Path: <haoyu.song@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 836DF13106E for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:06:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 Vw_fQyiOt-w7 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:06:23 -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 0559A1252B7 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 15EC2C93F6A9C for <ippm@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 19:06:19 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.38) by lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.43) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 19:06:20 +0000
Received: from SJCEML521-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.103]) by SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.237]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:06:14 -0700
From: Haoyu song <haoyu.song@huawei.com>
To: "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" <fbrockne@cisco.com>, IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
CC: "Brian Weis (bew)" <bew@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: draft-weis-ippm-ioam-gre-00 -> draft-weis-ippm-ioam-eth-00
Thread-Index: AdRscK+Hymk1mndDT3qYYjQH+2j5ygDQy83wAACj+yAAAKxlEA==
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 19:06:14 +0000
Message-ID: <78A2745BE9B57D4F9D27F86655EB87F93759216C@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <c4aabb12a62247ae8b6c3a7970a4ca88@XCH-RCD-008.cisco.com> <78A2745BE9B57D4F9D27F86655EB87F9375920A9@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com> <18855b4555ab47cf92dadd393b7a6bf9@XCH-RCD-008.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <18855b4555ab47cf92dadd393b7a6bf9@XCH-RCD-008.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.212.246.190]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_78A2745BE9B57D4F9D27F86655EB87F93759216Csjceml521mbschi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/AJWqIuHKTp25e8C7-0x1f2-W5Jw>
Subject: Re: [ippm] draft-weis-ippm-ioam-gre-00 -> draft-weis-ippm-ioam-eth-00
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: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 19:06:25 -0000

I guess I'm confused because I think Ethertype is used in MAC frame and after the MAC addresses to indicate the type of the upper layer protocol, but in the examples, it is in the GRE or Geneve header. My question is, why does it need to be an Ehtertype here?

Haoyu

From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) [mailto:fbrockne@cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 11:42 AM
To: Haoyu song <haoyu.song@huawei.com>; IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
Cc: Brian Weis (bew) <bew@cisco.com>
Subject: RE: draft-weis-ippm-ioam-gre-00 -> draft-weis-ippm-ioam-eth-00

Hi Haoyu,

hmm - the draft is very explicit on that, see section 3: "When the IOAM data fields are included within an encapsulation that identifies the next protocol using an EtherType (e.g., GRE or Geneve) the presence of IOAM data fields are identified with TBD_IOAM." - and the draft gives 2 examples in section 4, showing IOAM encapsulation options for Geneve and GRE. Not sure what else would be needed, i.e. what additional description are you looking for? IOAM data fields are of course defined elsewhere, see draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-04.

Cheers, Frank

From: Haoyu song <haoyu.song@huawei.com<mailto:haoyu.song@huawei.com>>
Sent: Montag, 29. Oktober 2018 19:22
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <fbrockne@cisco.com<mailto:fbrockne@cisco.com>>; IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org<mailto:ippm@ietf.org>>
Cc: Brian Weis (bew) <bew@cisco.com<mailto:bew@cisco.com>>
Subject: RE: draft-weis-ippm-ioam-gre-00 -> draft-weis-ippm-ioam-eth-00

Hi Frank and Brian,

I read the draft but couldn't figure out how it is related to Ethertype. It's mentioned in the draft but not explained. Maybe I missed something. Could you please clarify it a little it? Thanks!

Haoyu

From: ippm [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 7:49 AM
To: IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org<mailto:ippm@ietf.org>>
Cc: Brian Weis (bew) <bew@cisco.com<mailto:bew@cisco.com>>
Subject: [ippm] draft-weis-ippm-ioam-gre-00 -> draft-weis-ippm-ioam-eth-00

Dear IPPM WG,

given that Brian is currently OOO - I wanted to take the opportunity to point you to draft-weis-ippm-ioam-eth-00: When we reviewed draft-weis-ippm-ioam-gre-00 in our last meeting in Montreal, we concluded that we should treat encapsulations for protocols which use Ethertype and would add IOAM data fields as a header in sequence with other Ethertype-identified header the same (Alia was among those highlighting this point). A very straight forward and obvious ask. As a consequence, Brian took the effort to evolve the draft which was focused on GRE encap - and made it generic to protocols which use Ethertype. We'll discuss the draft as part of the IOAM slot in our meeting in BKK.

Frank