[ippm] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm-rfc8321bis-02: (with DISCUSS)

[Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ippm-rfc8321bis-02: 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-rfc8321bis/



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

Please clarify the expected deployment model of this approach.

(a) Section 7.1

   For security reasons, the Alternate Marking Method is RECOMMENDED
   only for controlled domains.

(b) Section 10
   This document specifies a method to perform measurements in the
   context of a Service Provider's network and has not been developed to
   conduct Internet measurements, so it does not directly affect
   Internet security nor applications that run on the Internet.

The text in (a) suggests that deployment can occur on the Internet (although it
isn’t recommended).  However, (b) and other documents out of IPPM (e.g.,
RFC9197) seem to suggest that OAM meta-data must be filtered.