Re: [ippm] IPPM slides for IOAM data fields and IOAM flags updates

[Tianran Zhou <[e-mail]>]

Hi Frank,

I think according to the side meeting in Prague, most of us believed an independent postcard option is better than the using of immediate export flag.
And draft-song-ippm-postcard-based-telemetry-04 has closed the discussion on flow id and sequence number by setting them optional.

Here are some of my thoughts:
- IOAM already has incremental tracing option and pre-allocated tracing option based on the way to operate metadata. Both have clear Semantics on operating metadata. It reasonable to use another option for PBT.
- Hardware is easy to realize the next step process by parsing the option type, without further flag matching.
- A new option will enable the extensibility for PBT related data fields. E.g., actions as proposed in the mailing list

What's your thoughts?

Thanks,
Tianran

________________________________
发件人: ippm [[e-mail]] 代表 Frank Brockners (fbrockne) [[e-mail]]
发送时间: 2019年7月22日 18:44
收件人: [e-mail]
主题: [ippm] IPPM slides for IOAM data fields and IOAM flags updates

Hi IOAM enthusiasts,

I’ve started to craft slides for the IOAM update in the IPPM WG meeting on Wednesday. Here is what I’ve assembled for covering draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-06 and draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags-00: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1nSbwvwWlexQ9Ns5VbtWavY9BQMpKT1RgjvCPGpwQFAw/

Appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Thanks, Frank