Re: [ippm] [spring] Active OAM in SRv6

Hi Haoyu

I think it would be good to identify the problem statement and gap with
existing IPPM WG STAMP, TWAMP PM technologies and why they cannot be
utilized or fall short in what you are trying to achieve with Active OAM in
SRv6.

In-situ IOAM data packets is already possible with SRv6 as mentioned as
this draft mentions below as normative reference.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-16

This draft as well mentioned as normative reference draft below provides
OAM ping and traceroute with SRH O flag to SRv6 PGM endpoints and SID list
tracing capabilities very handy for troubleshooting.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-1
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-12>3

This draft as well also mentioned as normative reference draft below
provides in-situ IOAM for OAM and PM information can be piggybacked in data
packets in SRH TLV SRv6 PGM SIF function SRv6.TLV recording the operational
and telemetry info in the data packets.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ali-spring-ioam-srv6-05

Thanks

Gyan

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:19 PM Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran=
40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Hi Haoyu,
>
>
>
> The application is really interesting and useful.
>
> I am not sure if it is necessary to create a new OAM protocol at transport
> layer.
>
> IMHO, a per hop/per segment extension based on STAMP could be more
> practical.
>
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-03.txt
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Tianran
>
>
>
> *From:* ippm [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Mirsky
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 27, 2022 7:01 AM
> *To:* Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
> *Cc:* spring@ietf.org; IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ippm] [spring] Active OAM in SRv6
>
>
>
> Hi Haoyu,
>
> thank you for bringing the topic of Active OAM to the discussion. As the
> concept of Active IOAM is introduced in the IPPM WG draft
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags> it
> seems to me like adding the IPPM WG community to the discussion is the
> right thing to do.
>
> Please find my notes in-lined below under the GIM>> tag.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 2:37 PM Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi SPRING WG,
>
>
>
> Real time monitor on every node and every link on a network is necessary
> to detect  gray failures, which are the key culprit for poor QoS but hard
> to catch. SR provides an ideal mechanism, when working with some efficient
> planning algorithm, to achieve that with low cost.   Our proposal SRv6
> In-situ Active Measurement (SIAM) suggests a simple  active measurement
> approach which can support different
>
> GIM>> I wonder what gaps you find in the existing active measurement
> protocols, e.g., STAMP and RFC 6734 (would be more convenient to use an
> acronym). It appears to me that, for example, STAMP and its extensions,
> including the SRPM draft
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-srpm>,
> comprehensively address the PM OAM requirements for SRv6.
>
> options of IOAM and other OAM methods in SRv6, without needing to worry
> about the extension header issue.
>
> GIM>> draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data classifies IOAM as follows:
>
>    In terms of the classification given
>
>    in [RFC7799] IOAM could be portrayed as Hybrid Type 1.
>
> Does your proposal change that?
>
>
>
> Your comments, questions, and suggestions are very welcome. I’d like to
> know your opinion if you think this work is in scope and should be adopted
> by the working group.  If you are interested in contributing to this work,
> please also let me know.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-song-spring-siam/
>
>
>
> Thank you very much!
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Haoyu
>
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
>
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> ippm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
>
-- 

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com <gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com>*

*M 301 502-1347*