Re: [ippm] Export of IOAM data

["Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Reshad,

Thanks. This is a good suggestion that we’ll follow for the next revision.

Cheers, Frank

From: Reshad Rahman <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, 4 March 2024 15:33
To: Justin Iurman <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Export of IOAM data

Thanks Frank, that makes sense. On top of using a different term than "coalescing", maybe add something along the lines that each packet would be in a different record (although maybe that's obvious).

Regards,
Reshad.

On Monday, March 4, 2024, 05:40:51 AM EST, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:



Hi Reshad,



Sorry for the delayed reply – and thanks for the reminder.



Please see inline...





From: Reshad Rahman <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Friday, 23 February 2024 04:54
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Justin Iurman <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Export of IOAM data



Hi Frank, all,



One basic question below on the document. In the requirements section we have the following:

   *  Support coalescing of the IOAM data from multiple packets into a

      single raw export packet.

Section 1.2 states the following is out of scope:

   *  Interpretation or aggregation of IOAM data prior to exporting.

I thought that coalescing was a form of aggregation, what am I missing/misunderstanding?





…FB: Good catch. It seems that the language used isn’t accurate enough, i.e., coalescing is the wrong term here.



What the draft intends to say is:

  *   For efficiency reasons, the exporting node can put the content of multiple packets that contain IOAM-Data-Fields into a single “raw export packet”. I.e., rather than send a “raw export packet” for every packet with IOAM-Data-Fields received, you can use one raw export packet to carry the IOAM info of multiple packets.
  *   The exporting node would not process the content of the IOAM-Data-Fields – like calculating means, etc. but keep the IOAM-Data-Fields retrieved from the live user traffic unchanged.



We’ll look for better language – and fix things in the next rev.



Cheers, Frank



Regards,

Reshad.

On Monday, February 12, 2024, 09:25:53 PM EST, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:





FYI - there is a new version https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport-07.txt - which includes a few editorial updates (updated references etc.).

Frank

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Sent: Thursday, 8 February 2024 12:14
> To: Justin Iurman <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
> Subject: RE: [ippm] Export of IOAM data
>
> +1 - let's refresh draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport and review it at the next
> IPPM WG meeting.
>
> Frank
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ippm <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> On Behalf Of Justin Iurman
> > Sent: Thursday, 8 February 2024 17:17
> > To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; draft-
> > [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
> > Subject: Re: [ippm] Export of IOAM data
> >
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > +1, now might be a good time to revive (again)
> > draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport. FWIW, I'd be available to help too.
> >
> > Justin
> >
> > On 2/8/24 05:36, [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > Dear Reshad,
> > >
> > > I am not aware of that draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport was update
> > > or any other draft defining IPFIX entities for IOAM.
> > >
> > > draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry describes in section 7.4
> > > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-pa
> > > th-
> > telemetry-06#section-7.4
> > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
> > opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-06#section-7.4>) the application of
> > on-path delay measurement export with IOAM.
> > >
> > > draft-gfz-opsawg-ipfix-alt-mark was resecently published and
> > > describes for Alternate Marking the IPFIX entities.
> > >
> > > I would available to support the co-authoring of such a document.
> > >
> > > Best wishes
> > >
> > > Thomas
> > >
> > > *From:*ippm <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> *On Behalf Of *Reshad Rahman
> > > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 7, 2024 3:14 PM
> > > *To:* IETF IPPM WG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;
> > > [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
> > > *Subject:* [ippm] Export of IOAM data
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *Be aware:*This is an external email.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Did the WG ever close on an export format for info obtained via
> > > IOAM? I don't actively follow this WG but checked the archive and
> > > it's been more than a year since draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport
> > > was mentioned (and it has expired).
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Reshad.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ippm mailing list
> > > [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ippm mailing list
> > [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm