[Last-Call] draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-ext-hdr-25 ietf last call Genart review

[Stewart Bryant via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Document: draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-ext-hdr
Title: Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) Extensions for
Reflecting STAMP Packet IP Headers Reviewer: Stewart Bryant Review result: Ready

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-ext-hdr-??
Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review Date: 2026-10-27
IETF LC End Date: 2026-10-15
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: Apologies that this slipped through the cracks and is late. From a
Genart perspective it is fine, although I did pick up one minor point on timing
accuracy in passing,

Major issues:none

Minor issues:none

Nits/editorial comments:

 The computation of the
   one-way delay metric requires the clocks on the Session-Sender and
   Session-Reflector to be synchronized, e.g., using PTPv2 [IEEE1588] or
   NTPv4 [RFC5905].

SB> Almost certainly good enough for these purposes, but path asymmetry also
affects TWTT such as 1588 (unless engineered out) and NTP (hard to engineer
out). If you want real accuracy suggest use of local GNSS time reference.