Re: [ippm] Adoption call for IOAM deployment and integrity documents

xiao.min2@zte.com.cn Thu, 12 August 2021 03:04 UTC

Return-Path: <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn>
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 498F23A3211 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 20:04:59 -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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 z4MqxFf-ObGV for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 20:04:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (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 742833A3210 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 20:04:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.238]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id D319D8BB5407A1515BE7; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:04:50 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp03.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.202]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 17C34iKc090720; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:04:44 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from xiao.min2@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp04[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:04:44 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:04:44 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afc61148fcc5299f142
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202108121104440429759@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <69C9F697-A970-41DD-B7EF-0C17204D57AA@apple.com>
References: 69C9F697-A970-41DD-B7EF-0C17204D57AA@apple.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
To: tpauly=40apple.com@dmarc.ietf.org
Cc: ippm@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn 17C34iKc090720
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/TEQTN51QiLeWrAxsQvLvjjK6KbQ>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Adoption call for IOAM deployment and integrity documents
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: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 03:05:00 -0000

Hi all,

Support WG adoption of these two IOAM documents.
For Section 5 of IOAM deployment draft - IOAM Encapsulations, suggest to add BIER(draft-xzlnp-bier-ioam) into the scope.

Best Regards,
Xiao Min
------------------原始邮件------------------
发件人:TommyPauly
收件人:IETF IPPM WG (ippm@ietf.org);
日 期 :2021年08月04日 00:29
主 题 :[ippm] Adoption call for IOAM deployment and integrity documents
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm

Hello IPPM,
As discussed in our meeting last week, we will be starting an adoption call for two IOAM-related documents that have been raised as important dependencies during the IESG review of IOAM-data.
This email begins a Working Group adoption call for two documents:
Integrity of In-situ OAM Data Fields
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-brockners-ippm-ioam-data-integrity/
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-brockners-ippm-ioam-data-integrity-03.html
In-situ OAM Deployment
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-brockners-opsawg-ioam-deployment/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-brockners-opsawg-ioam-deployment-03
This call will last until Wednesday, August 18. Please reply to this email with your comments, and if you think these documents should be taken on by IPPM.
Best,
Tommy & Ian