Re: [ippm] Request for WG adoption

Tommy Pauly <> Thu, 01 July 2021 16:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88D823A112E; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 09:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.294
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.294 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.198, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y-nI8HinmlZR; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 09:58:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBE173A0BAD; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 09:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd ( []) by ( with SMTP id 161Guni5002985; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 09:57:55 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=from : message-id : content-type : mime-version : subject : date : in-reply-to : cc : to : references; s=20180706; bh=qsts7TO2E7lClTL+lk+0sKRGflzmecdpJ/tuujFTtqA=; b=mvh9f6jiD6zudXjcqPKhb5x0zv0KmWw7e2sAqYqe2xZ/ZbIr5RRvltjvny+kc+iOStoe XVl+5gdYJ7AmV1kFNzMLa+Jn/QvueBVK1S9qZcMaBEdf2mi5Cww1M3M9OTpU9qibG6qL V6CebzbCJmu6iGJm0kCtpLFGYfXGGcV8J6JOJL4jAplrThqBimCIFx84fQ7Lgs2njnd8 tl6eM14E3n2hU31vMIrZcxFNAuC14EkA5CpbDakfzzv3ZtXjIMGV+YPxd4K3nbpXpJ9k cD0UN7/mIbiEr4aGEzId76XZL+cOqHAooRp3v8LMXqx86pMEEiUaIOI8J18EzZgjvxEZ kg==
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTP id 39e14b99m2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 01 Jul 2021 09:57:55 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 64bit (built Apr 15 2021)) with ESMTPS id <>; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 09:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from by (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 64bit (built Apr 15 2021)) id <>; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 09:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Va-T-CD: 97ec25d448966c2341d47bda8c893f57
X-Va-E-CD: 3fd67582c5555947567ebd1412cc7cd2
X-Va-R-CD: 99217f0a800d1695b9a5b1c2850daf46
X-Va-CD: 0
X-Va-ID: 0581fc1c-16f1-46bd-bbe0-e2a1cbf6bd37
X-V-T-CD: 97ec25d448966c2341d47bda8c893f57
X-V-E-CD: 3fd67582c5555947567ebd1412cc7cd2
X-V-R-CD: 99217f0a800d1695b9a5b1c2850daf46
X-V-CD: 0
X-V-ID: 7eac5064-e0a3-40b7-9664-235410c5ca94
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-07-01_09:2021-07-01, 2021-07-01 signatures=0
Received: from (unknown []) by (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 64bit (built Apr 15 2021)) with ESMTPSA id <>; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 09:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tommy Pauly <>
Message-id: <>
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_07AB345F-D42D-4439-8CBA-B2C0322FAAE4"
MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3681.\))
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 09:57:54 -0700
In-reply-to: <>
Cc: IPPM Chairs <>, IETF IPPM WG <>, "" <>
To: Haoyu Song <>
References: <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3681.
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-07-01_09:2021-07-01, 2021-07-01 signatures=0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Request for WG adoption
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 16:58:43 -0000

Hi Haoyu,

Thanks for bringing this up again. As we’ve discussed in several previous meetings, this seems to be mainly a high-level description of work that is already concrete in IOAM, DEX, etc. As such, I am inclined to say that its content should be in other drafts (as has been done).

Any adoption call would need to be predicated on more list discussion of the content.


> On Jun 30, 2021, at 10:59 AM, Haoyu Song <> wrote:
> Dear IPPM Chairs,
> I’m writing to request the IPPM WG to adopt the following draft “Postcard-based On-Path Flow Data Telemetry using Packet Marking”
> <>
> Now the draft is in -09 version and we have colleagues from Cisco, ZTE, Huawei as well as some network operators to coauthor this work.
> As another on-path telemetry technique, PBT based on packet marking complements the other works such as IOAM, DEX, and HTS to make the ecosystem complete, and I believe each can find its application scenarios. For example, the PBT based on packet marking has been applied in “draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam” ( <>) which I believe has passed the last call, but the detailed mechanisms such as configuration, data format, and export method are not covered there. Given the technique is equally applicable to other types of networks, we believe it’s necessary to have a  document to formalized the method.
> The draft has undergone a long line of developments since it was published in 2018. It originally covers two related but different techniques. One was latter stripped off to form an independent draft, IOAM DEX, which has been adopted by IPPM. The remaining one, PBT based on packet marking, is the core of the current draft. Thanks for the numerous discussions and feedbacks from the WG, we now have a draft with focused direction and relatively mature content.
> Given the community interest and the technical merit, we now request the WG to adopt the draft and engage the WG to work on it.
> Please let us know if there are any concerns, comments, and suggestions.   Thank you very much for your consideration!  
> Best regards,
> Haoyu