Re: [ippm] Side Meeting: IOAM Immediate Export Draft

Tal Mizrahi <tal.mizrahi.phd@gmail.com> Tue, 06 August 2019 05:50 UTC

Return-Path: <tal.mizrahi.phd@gmail.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 7E50D120024; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 a2kd404fBWQD; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x829.google.com (mail-qt1-x829.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::829]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0848C120132; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x829.google.com with SMTP id l9so83337807qtu.6; Mon, 05 Aug 2019 22:50:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=IBSDzVkey8jCuny0kD8+nAmxNoh6qchpTAsF8ra/1Jk=; b=cJxGLoQQR/CbcE7xdU0kDZWpOQ0gYQ8w/9lafFqOc/45TS45BfzTKrsUX7hSPSizj7 +P/5M3tt2H4YmqlFliVjc0ZU/uy8rKm2Neuj2RbZq5tBdNp8gm046JIwxXhGt43MM/xo GJD9HeGskjQ1A8p0qsVxMUcX/f2cH3aYQ3ebSA7nn9CRZxTxIAoVL6ja3FRra1sh1sbK H7268t/lQXavDTXiLfzOUxiYUnlJWVLBHcIzY8keomTwf7h3iw65gThrDqPieAoPQ56h Xb+gQuC88ABq60Z4gvp1ChM7/8/2tTOeiZSJNNe3Ag2eoHZmxwWln1vn+nC/SW3p3qe7 6v1Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=IBSDzVkey8jCuny0kD8+nAmxNoh6qchpTAsF8ra/1Jk=; b=OTICg3qBXHNuz326O4Y1susModIw7A0JNDjlf7E+E3wH2gjJ8Nm70RDFKaQLqcBJYs 1iS8ByCNUHqbgK7P6MXWdpMAt8MW6fRwx+DGXLN63Nrh0oo15uEkq1Xfbf0OO0od1294 TGqMdwNmXrLLAgPJ3iZy/K+ZRY34uin0AM6809ZOkXNOdLzMTt7jFEhnDiTfd1f4Jefv 5aG25y+bm+WuTL+SnS1sEZ4f1woL8EI+XYk2YgLZj6FCoJT4iQoNJC0SBbOH4vs9BG0E eUp3S36Xywy8PPVVMX1YHvCCLunZ3VnYSGZkjnMep2UDHZNOtjY8Rju4KrLNwp4nygoo CR2A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWRfq3qtyXnn040iGJhJfmTHnETMJwxbC/npsaq3gM8FQT8giQs LWG1KrK/6Gs9c8fpbqTUtb0MfNTjihv23BnjDVl4NgKF
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz7HUyauYd0AW5YG7Mori1OBDdvEOM9B3qafp+qZRpDbLwMr+hxpeQIzDsDY81a3f9gtZrZtvwSy7KaACxCR+Q=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:3737:: with SMTP id o52mr1550040qtb.9.1565070615950; Mon, 05 Aug 2019 22:50:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABUE3XnsPgdZB1_hF1KXqhw77-0h=xhJNZ+EB97b-=8C9GAAzg@mail.gmail.com> <AM6PR05MB411860A61F807A0BCA6196C4B9C00@AM6PR05MB4118.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM6PR05MB411860A61F807A0BCA6196C4B9C00@AM6PR05MB4118.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
From: Tal Mizrahi <tal.mizrahi.phd@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 08:50:03 +0300
Message-ID: <CABUE3XmWU7mUvAo4-zbT5ZuhR1e3V+4Qxz1MSVbf+NFMVEaBCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: IPPM Chairs <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>
Cc: IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>, Barak Gafni <gbarak@mellanox.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001cbed5058f6c6677"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/cdEY_9XJ46QthL0Un-3pcj4QYnY>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Side Meeting: IOAM Immediate Export Draft
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: Tue, 06 Aug 2019 05:50:21 -0000

Dear Chairs,

Following up on the request below, we are looking forward to have an
infrastructure (mailing list, Webex, Github folder) that will allow us to
make progress.
I am hoping to have a preliminary draft of the immediate exporting ready
for the design team's review by the end of August.

Thanks,
Tal.

On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 6:50 PM Barak Gafni <gbarak@mellanox.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> Please find below side meeting notes: Friday 26th July 8:30 am Notredam
>
>
>
> Summary:
>
>    - Group suggestion: for 00 draft we should define the new IOAM option
>    and keep single flag which tells “immediate export”. Additional
>    capabilities will be discussed towards 01 and beyond
>    - The group is asking the chairs to approve the need for a public IETF
>    mailing list for a “design” team and a public webex to allow the group to
>    progress on a weekly or bi-weekly cadence
>
>
>
> More details:
>
>    - The option is added / removed by the encap/decap nodes, read by the
>    intermediate nodes
>
>
>    - Tianran presented option defined a modified form from
>    draft-song-ippm-postcard-based-telemetry-04:
>
>
>
>        0             0 0             1 1             2 2             3
>
>        0             7 8             5 6             3 4             1
>
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>       |        Namespace ID           | Flags | action|  Hop Count    |
>
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>       |         IOAM-Trace-Type                       |  Reserved     |
>
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>       |                         Flow ID (optional)                    |
>
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>       |                     Sequence Number  (Optional)               |
>
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>
>
> Below comments came from discussion of the above and the content of
> immediate export to answer:
>
>    1. What to export
>    2. Where to export
>    3. When to export
>
>
>
>    - Discussed potential fields in the option header, beyond 00 draft:
>       - Discussed the option to add “actions”, although may change the
>       name
>       - The original flags from the flags draft may be reconsidered
>          - Overflow may become redundant
>          - Active is still relevant
>          - Loopback should be considered
>          - Immediate export – whether it is implicit or should be explicit
>       - IOAM trace type should stay as is to help collector and trace
>       implementation to maintain consistent node data parsing.
>       - Consider whether to have the sequence number and flow id. The
>       interpretation is through the higher layer length. Will be included as
>       optional at the 00 draft
>          - Sequence number – suggestion is to use the e2e sequence number
>          - Anyway, agreement is that the sequence number and the flow id
>          go as a pair.
>       - Flags should reside in a similar place as at the ioam tracing
>       options
>    - Suggest to use the raw export draft to export the data
>       - Need to follow up on the raw export
>       - Need to clarify the behavior, so the node 0 will follow the
>       captured immediate export option
>    - Suggest not to add hop count at this stage, as it adds more
>    complexity to the processing, in addition for example to reducing TTL
>    - As for the suggestion on the “actions” presented in the meeting
>       - Two types – actions need to get executed by the node vs
>       conditions for any execution
>          - Conditions – there are too many, discussion inclined towards
>          not using specific condition. Going forward the group intend to consider
>          export on exception/alarm without defining what exception/alarm are
>          - Log – needs further discussion. We believe we shouldn’t define
>          what is the protocol and where should the logging reside. The indication to
>          export is what we are using. Need further discussion on export to some
>          preconfigured collector, export to the source of the packet or record the
>          data locally.
>       - Side note regarding rawexport – consider export reason – how and
>    if is it related to the IOAM protocol. Should consider remove it from
>    rawexport?
>    - Tal Mizrahi volunteered to write and publish the 00 draft in
>    collaboration with people who join the design team.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Barak
>
>
>
> *From:* ippm <ippm-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of * Tal Mizrahi
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 24, 2019 4:24 PM
> *To:* IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
> *Cc:* IPPM Chairs <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* [ippm] Side Meeting: IOAM Immediate Export Draft
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Time: Friday, 8:30-9:45.
>
> Room: Coller
>
> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ietf/meeting/wiki/105sidemeetings
> <https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftrac.ietf.org%2Ftrac%2Fietf%2Fmeeting%2Fwiki%2F105sidemeetings&data=02%7C01%7Cgbarak%40mellanox.com%7C7b0e46c15e5f4cd01d5e08d71074e672%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C636995966577906606&sdata=7Qgkw9dlo2wEANwsxk%2B4ndyu%2BYag3OUKRZa0yHm5shQ%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> Details:
>
> We are going to hold a side meeting on Friday morning to discuss the
> outline of the new draft that will describe the immediate export IOAM
> option.
>
>
>
> The meeting is open to all, and specifically intended for authors and
> contributors of the related IOAM drafts.
>
>
>
> Minutes will be sent to the list after the meeting.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tal.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>