IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ippm] New Draft draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Tue, 17 July 2018 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@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 109A9130E21; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 AuzWAJsgMAp0; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:30:34 -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 EFE2112F295; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:30:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id p10-v6so1980192ljg.2; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:30:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=dkr/qCl4pd8R3gTp1AyyXJVuGQV3xXWTvEOjadn47ZE=; b=CuIm0PX9NGYp0634TPu4xXj9k8ffke1SKAEHyVR6vMXu03sYeXnMMiuaLRGKVGS3RV ywbSQKRaq85uLw5vvd0NwFjXIYq+FCRsi1pBBH8Zn8TgSv6JZfMWAhjB3Q5WBAkO3fhL ejGZjfbZLOeIxzSOxqoRk+foKa1ms+BN1cvrRP0aWEshKLtFZiDq1dtEvKGPRJgUCGZ1 fUqJKee1XnhMlQrRmW+8ht72M3AaP0vrweasO+Ku++hHY7dnX51PD8RyAU05SJGZfBpF oO+vayzyEUG+hRey8wXK37pXhBS4GPfiIYrsz/KGObS/gmi5RFlUsQF4YXVc490+OaNX NRAA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=dkr/qCl4pd8R3gTp1AyyXJVuGQV3xXWTvEOjadn47ZE=; b=EbjeEvzTTOAvyWTa6R52I2MPvJtfuXhVcV3NGXhDYzCCuOvsQl0AUEhPKAe+r3uQew zEGJzENfst14gkmUDqtoVja9fwmGJfgcJ360pFbbAU9+UIKQnHVs3UX6eMyl9uFddPeH 4exkdRK66S1oRUCcFvq2/B+CYm+BgBpWxd70Nz360RSTG7s/8GG+ZHdvFGtasnH9n0lS NITg0L4s6CXqONL6yr4sF4Oj6SbgYHHzD1pDdt7CIirt/xwLIfY5fC4wWebCuH+eZDGL uOzqh9ljqI2sKg3/gcbsxk35bneXg4TN3KA7OfCUnX7lEANi1t/4Bl+TKNFPc4yF4qEi eYJA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEukVMUSuyE0JwgjDcRxZ1xkMcG95k63+snScnY9BtsMMZpJrZI UWv7YOjcLeHxgyOfhqEo3bdN+nV+upgD+mMuNks=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcOQHhcqMxJpsHyn/Z4+4JxAIoNTdByXi1f37wu4eWwLSkAHFwQ3X7SjmAqDFK2AFPnwXNdjfI3oKMRclruMb0=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9d0e:: with SMTP id t14-v6mr2318710lji.112.1531855831976; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:30:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a2e:709:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:30:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <92ED16BE-ACDF-4901-91B5-BC39A744C2F1@cisco.com>
References: <92ED16BE-ACDF-4901-91B5-BC39A744C2F1@cisco.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:30:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXsz+5OXeU+YSfLErV_L6+egwaz7nH5FyVZOjzAS4i9eg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>, spring <spring@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b64fdd057136facd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/mkVSaupGda90NGHCKhs-YVjg7Xk>
Subject: Re: [ippm] New Draft draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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, 17 Jul 2018 19:30:37 -0000

Hi Rakesh,
thank you for bringing this draft up for discussion. There was not enough
time to ask questions at the SPRING WG meeting and this is a very good
opportunity.
I understand that you've proposed to use RFC 6374 to encode PM operations
and measurements. Also, you've referenced work on OWAMP and TWAMP. But I
don't find any reference to STAMP
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-01>in the draft. How
would you position STAMP, its optional extensions
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mirsky-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-01>, and YANG
model <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-yang-01> in
comparison with your new draft?

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 6:57 AM, Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi) <
rgandhi=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Hi WG,
>
>
>
> We like to introduce following new draft that was presented to SPRING WG
> yesterday.
>
>
>
> This draft defines IP/UDP path for sending probe query messages for delay
> and loss measurement that is agnostics to data plane (SR-MPLS/SRv6/IP) and
> does not require to bootstrap PM session.
>
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm/
>
>
>
> You may find presentation in the following package (it is the second
> draft).
>
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-
> 102-spring-13-performance-measurement-in-sr-networks-00
>
>
>
> We welcome your comments and suggestions.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rakesh (On behalf of authors and contributors)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> ippm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email