[ippm] Comments on draft-fioccola-ippm-on-path-active-measurements

xiao.min2@zte.com.cn Thu, 15 August 2024 09:14 UTC

Return-Path: <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn>
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 E1199C15109F for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 02:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.205
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.205 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EK2kQrliXIif for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 02:14:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.216.63.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A85C5C151072 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 02:14:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mse-fl2.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.5.228.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxhk.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4Wkzw133Ywz8R046; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 17:14:25 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njb2app06.zte.com.cn ([10.55.23.119]) by mse-fl2.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 47F9EBNU012367; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 17:14:11 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from xiao.min2@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njy2app02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 17:14:14 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 17:14:14 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa66bdc6e6fffffffffe5-f0e7d
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <20240815171414088-pztrBYQ-8_IblmZIXgvf@zte.com.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
To: giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl2.zte.com.cn 47F9EBNU012367
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 66BDC6F1.000/4Wkzw133Ywz8R046
Message-ID-Hash: IX7GJVMLU2YCLSVM43663SF7P35CBGOD
X-Message-ID-Hash: IX7GJVMLU2YCLSVM43663SF7P35CBGOD
X-MailFrom: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ippm.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [ippm] Comments on draft-fioccola-ippm-on-path-active-measurements
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/olud84MFaJVVkYkkqtYo-jNFBIE>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ippm-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ippm-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ippm-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Giuseppe,

Thank you for the interesting draft.
As promised at IETF 120, I'd like to provide below comments for you to consider.
Section 1, considering the purpose of this draft is to discuss the integration of active OAM tools and on-path telemetry options, I'm not sure ICMP needs to be mentioned as an active tool. AFAIK, there are no any on-path telemetry options defined for ICMP. Besides, MPLS LSP Ping and RFC 6374 are two candidates of applicable active tools to be mentioned here.
Section 1.1, this draft has an intended status of Informational, so it seems this section can be removed.
Section 2, s/next sections explains/next sections explain.
Section 2.1, Figure 2, it seems to me MPLS LSP Ping is more appropriate than ICMP when applied to MPLS data plane.
Section 2.2, s/it was also specified the TWAMP protocol/the TWAMP protocol is also specified.
Section 3.1, a reference to draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-sr can be added as an example integrating MPLS active measurement tool and Alternate-Marking method.

Best Regards,
Xiao Min