Re: [ippm] New Version for draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-01

yanghongwei <yanghongwei@chinamobile.com> Fri, 30 October 2020 02:32 UTC

Return-Path: <yanghongwei@chinamobile.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 DFDC83A0779 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 19:32:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FONT_INVIS_MSGID=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, 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 2LUEsvdcWdT2 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 19:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmccmta3.chinamobile.com (cmccmta3.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 586913A0408 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 19:32:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.121.9]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app12-12012 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2eec5f9b7b290fd-35ece; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 10:32:10 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2eec5f9b7b290fd-35ece
X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from cmcc (unknown[10.2.50.242]) by rmsmtp-syy-appsvr05-12005 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee55f9b7b29003-ad644; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 10:32:10 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee55f9b7b29003-ad644
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 10:32:17 +0800
From: yanghongwei <yanghongwei@chinamobile.com>
To: wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com>, ippm <ippm@ietf.org>
References: <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F405050B14@dggeml524-mbx.china.huawei.com>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.2.18.95[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2020103010321696113322@chinamobile.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart573203653081_=----"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/bWXb2ox1a8zvKFLli6IB4W6IWXw>
Subject: Re: [ippm] New Version for draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-01
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: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 02:49:46 -0000

Hi Yali,

I think this is a useful solution. Hop-by-hop network measurement is very necessary in many scenarios. 
I have a few questions.
1. Why is it combined with OAM packets and how to deal with devices that do not support OAM?
2. Latency, jitter, and packet loss are mentioned in the document, but link bandwidth utilization is also an important indicator. Can it also be implemented in this solution?

Thanks and Best Regards,
Hongwei.



Hongwei Yang
 
From: wangyali
Date: 2020-10-27 21:48
To: ippm
Subject: [ippm] New Version for draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-01
Hello WG,
 
Draft about extensions to STAMP enable hop-by-hop OAM data measurement and collection has been updated, which was presented in IETF108. Questions and comments are welcome.
 
Because the performance of intermediate nodes and links that STAMP test packets traverse are invisible, to solve this problem, this draft extents optional TLVs to STAMP and inserts IOAM Trace option data in the test packets or dispatches test packets to the OAM process at OAM Endpoint.
 
In this case, the STAMP instance does not need to be configured at every intermediate node to measure the performance of intermediate nodes, which decreases the complexity of OAM in large-scale networks.
 
What do you think?
 
Best regards,
Yali
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 9:03 PM
To: wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com>; Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-01.txt
 
 
A new version of I-D, draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-01.txt
has been successfully submitted by Yali Wang and posted to the IETF repository.
 
Name:           draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions
Revision:       01
Title:          Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol Extensions for Hop-by-Hop OAM Data Collection
Document date:  2020-10-27
Group:          Individual Submission
Pages:          10
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-01.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions/
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-01
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-01
 
Abstract:
   This document defines optional TLVs which are carried in Simple Two-
   way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) test packets to enhance the
   STAMP base functions.  Such extensions to STAMP enable OAM data
   measurement and collection at every node and link along a STAMP test
   packet's delivery path.
 
 
 
 
 
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
 
The IETF Secretariat
 
 
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm