Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03.txt

["Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Al,
Many thanks for the review. Please see replies inline with <RG>…

From: ippm <[e-mail]> on behalf of MORTON JR., AL <[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 at 6:18 PM
To: Tommy Pauly <tpauly=[e-mail]>, IETF IPPM WG <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03.txt
Hi Tommy and IPPM,

There seems like good support for taking-up this draft already, so I’ll add a few comments/questions.

In the *second sentence*, 😊

SR is applicable to both Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-
   MPLS) and IPv6 (SRv6) data planes [RFC8402<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8402>].
                       ^^^^^^^^^^
Forwarding planes or control planes seems more correct at this point in the description.
Yes, I understand that we will be measuring the IP path, but that happens after
introducing SR and RFC 8402.

<RG> Ok to change this in the next revision.

In section 3, at the end  (where the draft handles a test packet reaching the wrong destination):


   ... The STAMP Session-Reflector that supports

   this TLV, MUST NOT transmit reply test packet if it is not the

   intended destination node of the received Session-Sender test packet.

I think it would be more operationally sound to reply with an “Error: wrong destination” indication
(maybe just for a few packets) when the Destination Node Address TLV doesn’t match, rather than
black-holing the test packets with no feedback. This must have been a problem that is prevalent-
enough to warrant the Destination Node Address TLV to protect measurement integrity. I’m just
suggesting that we help the test org when we can.

<RG> Ok to add this in the next revision.

The rest looks ok to me at the moment. Thanks for a good effort, authors!

<RG> Many thanks.

Regards,
Rakesh


Al



From: ippm <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Tommy Pauly
Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 4:43 PM
To: IETF IPPM WG <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03.txt

Hi IPPM,

This draft has been discussed and debated at length before, and the chairs would like to get input from the WG on their thoughts on this version of the document and its direction. Given the interaction with other working groups, we’d like to make progress on this in a timely fashion.

Please do send your thoughts and feedback to the list, particularly if you support this work, or if you have concerns new or existing.

Best,
Tommy



On May 3, 2021, at 9:42 AM, Rakesh Gandhi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Hi WG,
This revision contains following updates:

  *   Welcome Richard as a co-author
  *   Merge Segment List Sub-TLVs
  *   Various editorial changes

Welcome your review comments and suggestions.

Thanks,
Rakesh (for co-authors)


On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 7:03 PM <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IP Performance Measurement WG of the IETF.

        Title           : Simple TWAMP (STAMP) Extensions for Segment Routing Networks
        Authors         : Rakesh Gandhi
                          Clarence Filsfils
                          Daniel Voyer
                          Mach(Guoyi) Chen
                          Bart Janssens
                          Richard Foote
        Filename        : draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03.txt
        Pages           : 12
        Date            : 2021-04-29

Abstract:
   Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm.  SR is
   applicable to both Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-MPLS) and IPv6
   (SRv6) data planes.  This document specifies RFC 8762 (Simple Two-Way
   Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP)) extensions for SR networks, for
   both SR-MPLS and SRv6 data planes by augmenting the optional
   extensions defined in RFC 8972.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm/__;!!BhdT!3G9e0gVbqR-U1_DXAkMexECpUR-T0SkaBKPrisL66T_y_wod9mGnRjTFCb9V$>

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03__;!!BhdT!3G9e0gVbqR-U1_DXAkMexECpUR-T0SkaBKPrisL66T_y_wod9mGnRjVY2APL$>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03__;!!BhdT!3G9e0gVbqR-U1_DXAkMexECpUR-T0SkaBKPrisL66T_y_wod9mGnRtQTf63g$>

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm-03__;!!BhdT!3G9e0gVbqR-U1_DXAkMexECpUR-T0SkaBKPrisL66T_y_wod9mGnRnAt9rKc$>


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<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/tools.ietf.org/__;!!BhdT!3G9e0gVbqR-U1_DXAkMexECpUR-T0SkaBKPrisL66T_y_wod9mGnRp_qDpwP$>.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__ftp:/ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/__;!!BhdT!3G9e0gVbqR-U1_DXAkMexECpUR-T0SkaBKPrisL66T_y_wod9mGnRp4yrs_L$>


_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm__;!!BhdT!3G9e0gVbqR-U1_DXAkMexECpUR-T0SkaBKPrisL66T_y_wod9mGnRnJ73ayt$>
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm__;!!BhdT!3G9e0gVbqR-U1_DXAkMexECpUR-T0SkaBKPrisL66T_y_wod9mGnRnJ73ayt$>