Re: [ippm] [spring] Updates to draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm-05.txt

Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 10 March 2020 13:27 UTC

Return-Path: <rgandhi.ietf@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 8D9A23A12E8; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 g8EbtpKu-aAE; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (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 C9FCB3A11B3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:27:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id f13so14136683ljp.0; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:27:00 -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=FiZfr+eCs3WEUZL5b88fgBJjWlkP/A2etDQLNJo7gno=; b=d4nh4mXj1bvRY6uvjE3UUK+jdRTzewfQPimsLrGgVkUlqnFNhEneVi3CCv5J4wBMg8 VMMvfR/XfFSgJ0asjFoi7+Hr9aTn/UYRVG7mvBZ+Q/TI8PSotGGlkSkzyvHEMXkawaGN tHZdIe+oyakRggp49xo0qWolCqiU4hLJSHVGXCd7Me6moHaNPmUKk0kdMyWBvuGAp8ms F2cvaLzYY7W5FaRNWqMLOS2m/UJCxrKsivrlXo6MeIgN+3+65ShedtYSo/MGNtr8dOpx Ce/2UaaCkJo8KoWCl2NleSHHvIux1650oZ6roLAKIwSomeESOTv5cvdjimc3DZyG1sDF 9QzQ==
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=FiZfr+eCs3WEUZL5b88fgBJjWlkP/A2etDQLNJo7gno=; b=o2OKal3lADi3mnDomk5sNrmPOyh1d+qlEE6goVHLAZ5dFmBKnNqfGb5b862sw3pfQT vcSE3UmZ64mhTkHwtSAolKuw62fBQd6NaOKeaFNpPRcgKOKfAeQ4jF9zSacRZh6xdM4F f6rkhDs1zQ2xOyEunfXIGKtyCJp4X0sRGrCdBf13C6YnFmu1Q3qv5wpMNJKIrf+yrll7 4jqFf+Q9YQxwJ1YUQmhDTIxvuXDkdlQW4gHP7vAZ0mNf+wgtDxuGeXg9C80ae/hxM/ww 1oDQ0adYw4x/3mVzK4t4m4FK7OYKsbAkR9qI3KCgouLjMtrCaiEfvTwzyaBka2nvcQVV qyJw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1vXmTu331ZNZ6xqVjtKqkx68p4bsVSiP9Mnnl8UYX13QSPDbnT wFWlhyeCuF9PMz4uIivytlG0kCmHvrt4LuvWpA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vtko+bZthJBiBN1SuSRaPrTgtJwKbcOrurPwjEu?= =?utf-8?q?eW8uplm4BsG4q6GcdIUBg/3Mm860lJ+Oq9gSAP8HBefrV6g=3D?=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:2007:: with SMTP id s7mr5549899ljo.214.1583846818491; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMZsk6f9Nuui4cU+fwoqLZcq6Bz21Z0cd4q5RwMypNZxF1Mk6g@mail.gmail.com> <CA+RyBmWgAJHYke_J92f=8oxWwbf7=qF-oS4NYhzgTZ1mFxmvvg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+RyBmWgAJHYke_J92f=8oxWwbf7=qF-oS4NYhzgTZ1mFxmvvg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:26:47 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMZsk6cr+=FrDOXGkgKXdF8xKPyJ2Oj+VYuggFxwUzFoe8UvWg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>, IPPM Chairs <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>, spring-chairs@ietf.org, spring <spring@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000feb1b805a0801206"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/k1hNBz80w-jTE5FxCrTAd4wJ9LM>
Subject: Re: [ippm] [spring] Updates to draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm-05.txt
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, 10 Mar 2020 13:27:04 -0000

Thanks Greg for your review comments. Please see inline with <RG>..

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 11:09 AM Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Rakesh,
> my apologies for the belated response and comments that you can find below:
>
>    - as I understand, the draft is applicable to TWAMP Light mode,
>    mentioned in the informational Appendix I in RFC 5357, not the TWAMP
>    protocol itself. Since TWAMP Light is not a standard but its idea is
>    described in the informational text only, I think that the Informational
>    track is more appropriate for this specification.
>
> <RG> The document defines procedures for SR.


>
>    - I with the introduction of the Control Code field you propose the
>    update to the STAMP base test packet defined in draft-ietf-ippm-stamp
>    <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-stamp/>. How the
>    proposed change benefits STAMP protocol? As I understand, the Control Code
>    field is introduced only for the benefit of the mechanism you propose for
>    the Segment Routing. Does it have broader applicability? Why not use the
>    accepted by IPPM WG STAMP extension model and use TLV?
>
> <RG> I will prepare few slides to discuss different options.


>
>    - also, the update introduces Loss Measurement Query Message Formats
>    and Loss Measurement Response Message Formats for STAMP, which are the
>    changes to draft-ietf-ippm-stamp, which has already been approved by IESG
>    for publication. I couldn't find the explanation of why these mechanisms
>    cannot use the extension mechanism already accepted by IPPM WG for STAMP,
>    TLVs, as has been done for Direct Loss Measurement. I hope the authors will
>    expand on the rationale of introducing new constructs in the STAMP base
>    specification instead of using the TLV-based extension mechanism.
>
> <RG> This was discussed previously.
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/JmS56RM5IskNSjshpFNGa9G_nf8/



> And in connection to my comments related to the proposed changes in STAMP
> is the question to SPRING and IPPM WGs Chairs:
>
>    - the authors of the draft have changed the title to reflect the
>    change in the scope of the draft.  Now the draft updates not only
>    informational document that was produced by IPMM WG but the standards track
>    document. I think that though Chairs of IPPM and SPRING WGs had discussed
>    where to anchor this specification, the change in scope may be significant
>    enough to require another round. Alternatively, changes to STAMP protocol
>    may be the basis for the new draft that, preferably, be anchored in the WG
>    that is actively working on defining the STAMP specification and the
>    mechanism to extend STAMP functionalities.
>
>
<RG> STAMP has been in the scope since the beginning.
Please see slide #9 presented in IPPM WG in Montreal at IETF 105 (July 2019)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-ippm-8-draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm-01-00

Thanks,
Rakesh



> Regards,
> Greg
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 10:30 PM Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi WG,
>> We have posted a revised draft with the following updates:
>>
>>    - Added control-code field (similar to RFC 6374)
>>    - Added Node-Address TLV (e.g. destination-address) – to carry the
>>    intended recipient of the probe query when using 127/8 address
>>    - Added Return Address in the Return Path TLV – to send reply to
>>    other than source-address
>>    - Added SR Policy with different endpoint addresses
>>    - Various editorial changes
>>
>>
>>
>> Welcome your review comments and suggestions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Rakesh (on behalf of authors)
>>
>>
>> On 2019-12-05, 1:48 PM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org"
>> <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>     A new version of I-D, draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm-05.txt
>>
>>     has been successfully submitted by Rakesh Gandhi and posted to the
>>
>>     IETF repository.
>>
>>
>>
>>     Name:                              draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm
>>
>>     Revision:          05
>>
>>     Title:                  Performance Measurement Using TWAMP Light
>> for Segment Routing Networks
>>
>>     Document date:           2019-12-05
>>
>>     Group:                              Individual Submission
>>
>>     Pages:                               30
>>
>>     URL:
>> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm-05.txt
>>
>>     Status:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm/
>>
>>     Htmlized:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm-05
>>
>>     Htmlized:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm
>>
>>     Diff:
>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm-05
>>
>>
>>
>>     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 procedure for sending
>>
>>        and processing probe query and response messages for Performance
>>
>>        Measurement (PM) in Segment Routing networks.  The procedure uses
>> the
>>
>>        mechanisms defined in RFC 5357 (Two-Way Active Measurement
>> Protocol
>>
>>        (TWAMP) Light) and Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol
>> (STAMP)
>>
>>        for Delay Measurement, and also uses the mechanisms defined in
>> this
>>
>>        document for Loss Measurement.  The procedure specified is
>> applicable
>>
>>        to SR-MPLS and SRv6 data planes and are used for both links and
>>
>>        end-to-end SR Policies.
>>
>>
>>
>>     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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> spring mailing list
>> spring@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
>>
>