Re: [lmap] One example of a "passive measurement peer"

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 08:15:52AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote:
> Guys,
> 
> If I look in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eardley-lmap-terminology-02, I see the definition of measurement peer as:
> 
> Measurement Peer: The function that receives control messages and test packets from a Measurement Agent and may reply to the
> Measurement Agent as defined by the Measurement Method. 
>
> Is this correct?
 
Note that the terminology was moved into

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lmap-framework-03

and there is another udpate of this document pending...
 
> Now, imagine the following scenario in a hybrid measurement technique:
> 
> 1.  In the MA, the hybrid technique is to have the MA to append x bytes of diagnostic data to each passive packet.  For example, via a command to the operating system.
> 
> 2.  The MA resides in the client
> 
> 3. It would be ideal to have the partner that the client is having the session with (let's call it "server") also participate in this appending of x bytes of diagnostic data from his side.  (Leaving aside for the moment the potential for this to be a DoS vector.  That is a separate discussion). 
> 
> 4.  In this case, could the MA not ask the "other end" to participate in extra data gathering?  This would be a control message from an MA as defined above.
> 
> Would this be an example of a Measurement Peer in a hybrid scenario?
> 
> I ask because this is what we are thinking we may want to do.
> 
> What am I missing?  Is my understanding of this OK?  Please advise.

Sure, an MA can have a control dialog with a remote MP. TWAMP and
OWAMP would be examples of such control protocols. From an LMAP
perspective, this interaction is out of scope of the LMAP protocol(s).

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>