[ippm] missed comments on draft-mirsky-ippm-epm in today's IPPM meeting
"Yangfan(Fan,IP Standards)" <shirley.yangfan@huawei.com> Thu, 11 November 2021 19:32 UTC
Return-Path: <shirley.yangfan@huawei.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 868783A0C77; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 11:32:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 xPchbYSYOlpc; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 11:32:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F6353A0C75; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 11:32:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fraeml703-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.200]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4HqsFs1Qlkz67Twy; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 03:28:33 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepeml500004.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.141) by fraeml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.52) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2308.15; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 20:32:08 +0100
Received: from kwepeml500003.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.182) by kwepeml500004.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.15; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 03:32:06 +0800
Received: from kwepeml500003.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.182]) by kwepeml500003.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.182]) with mapi id 15.01.2308.015; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 03:32:06 +0800
From: "Yangfan(Fan,IP Standards)" <shirley.yangfan@huawei.com>
To: "draft-mirsky-ippm-epm@ietf.org" <draft-mirsky-ippm-epm@ietf.org>
CC: "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: missed comments on draft-mirsky-ippm-epm in today's IPPM meeting
Thread-Index: AdfXMC4Wn/uDQ+RuR5eoYasDpDrFtA==
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 19:32:06 +0000
Message-ID: <935ad14c8d784caa9db383f2fb9df24d@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.45.165.218]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_935ad14c8d784caa9db383f2fb9df24dhuaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/ndpzpWqQa1chpGGfrT_SzfKe0aw>
Subject: [ippm] missed comments on draft-mirsky-ippm-epm in today's IPPM meeting
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: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 19:32:15 -0000
Dear authors, Due to limited time in today's meeting, I had to come back to the list with my comments. 1) In the draft, the terminology of error is not explicitly defined. We wouldn't know what metric/event/state would be called as error. The I-D mentioned ITU-T G.826, it is confusing whether it is the error bit in constant bit rate transmission. It will be good to clarify it in later revisions. 2) EPM is mentioned as a state based mechanism. I question whether it is an effective way in packet switched network. In PSN, BER value on physical interface is commonly used as the parameter to indicate error on physical links. Why bother to define the statistical multiplexing parameters? 3) The concept of Xaas imported in the new revision is quite confusing to me. What exactly relations between Xaas and EPM, what relations it is between MTBF/MTTR metrics and ES/SES/EFS metrics defined for Xaas and EPM respectively? It is much appreciated if the authors can kindly clarify the questions. Best regards, Fan
- [ippm] missed comments on draft-mirsky-ippm-epm i… Yangfan(Fan,IP Standards)
- Re: [ippm] missed comments on draft-mirsky-ippm-e… Hesham ElBakoury