[ippm] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-09: (with DISCUSS)

Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 29 June 2022 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17700C15AD28; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 14:20:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export@ietf.org, ippm-chairs@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org, tpauly@apple.com, tpauly@apple.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 8.5.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Zaheduzzaman Sarker <Zaheduzzaman.Sarker@ericsson.com>
Message-ID: <165653760608.27520.5309528880057245173@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 14:20:06 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/loyRQ3AslkX7n578en996ehOAs0>
Subject: [ippm] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-09: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 21:20:06 -0000

Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-09: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for working on this specification.

Thanks to Colin Perkins for his valuable TSVART review. I find the TSVART early
reviewer's concern on rate limiting the exported traffic triggered by DEX
Option-type as only protection mechanism
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/1WNgYWGJmxLd4f3RAiDk-LJ-S8Y/)
very valid but haven't seen it addressed. In this discuss, I would like to
bring back attention to that concern and would like to discuss why there should
not be a circuit breaker kind of functionality required here?

I also think this specification should be explicit about not exporting IOAM
data to any receiver outside of IOAM limited domain. Hence supporting Roman's
discuss.

for example - The introduction section can state-

OLD text-

   A
   "receiving entity" in this context can be, for example, an external
   collector, analyzer, controller, decapsulating node, or a software
   module in one of the IOAM nodes.

New text-

   A
   "receiving entity" in this context can be, for example, an external
   collector, analyzer, controller, decapsulating node, or a software
   module in one of the IOAM nodes with in IOAM limited domain.