Re: [ippm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-11.txt> (Data Fields for In-situ OAM) to Proposed Standard

Sorry about the defective post before the one I meant to sent.

Both get bounce messages that delivery has failed to
shwethab@exch.cisco.com
which I note is not the address in the I-D.

Tom Petch

________________________________________
From: ippm <ippm-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>
Sent: 02 December 2020 10:46
To: last-call@ietf.org
Cc: acm@research.att.com; ippm-chairs@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data@ietf.org; ippm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ippm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-11.txt> (Data Fields for In-situ OAM) to Proposed Standard

This I-D seems at odds with RFC8126 over the use of Expert Review in s.8.7

' the responsible AD will appoint ...'
RFC8126 seems clear that the IESG appoints and may do so in advance and
having more than one expert is recommended

'the expert will approve or deny..'
RFC8126 seems clear that that is the role of IANA.  The expert
recommends and it is then up to IANA to accept or reject.

'the expert can approve allocations.'
No, that is the role of IANA; early allocation is possible but that is
the decision of IANA.

In passing,
'The meaning of bit 0
perhaps better as value 0

s.8.1
/this draft/this memo/

s.3
needs updating to conform to RFC8174

Tom Petch

On 24/11/2020 18:23, The IESG wrote:
>
> The IESG has received a request from the IP Performance Measurement WG (ippm)
> to consider the following document: - 'Data Fields for In-situ OAM'
>    <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-11.txt> as Proposed Standard
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2020-12-08. Exceptionally, comments may
> be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
> of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
> Abstract
>
>
>     In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) records
>     operational and telemetry information in the packet while the packet
>     traverses a path between two points in the network.  This document
>     discusses the data fields and associated data types for in-situ OAM.
>     In-situ OAM data fields can be encapsulated into a variety of
>     protocols such as NSH, Segment Routing, Geneve, IPv6 (via extension
>     header), or IPv4.  In-situ OAM can be used to complement OAM
>     mechanisms based on e.g.  ICMP or other types of probe packets.
>
>
>
>
> The file can be obtained via
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data/
>
>
> The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D:
>
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3526/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> IETF-Announce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
> .
>

_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm