[mpls] Re: Poll: IOAM and PSD

[Haoyu Song <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tony,

My response is inline.

Regards,
Haoyu

From: Tony Li <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Tony Li
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2024 8:26 AM
To: mpls <[e-mail]>
Subject: [mpls] Poll: IOAM and PSD


[WG chair hat: on]



Hi all,



We’ve had many discussions about IOAM and PSD over the last few years. We need to reach consensus on the problems that need to be addressed in these areas. Therefore, we would like to hear from everyone, especially independent operators:



  1.  There are many flavors of IOAM.  Which ones would you like to deploy/implement with MNA?



[HS] I’d like MNA to support IOAM DEX and Trace option as specified in RFC9326 and RFC9197 using PSD. The reasons are:

     *   Comply with existing standards, can be directly used without any hassle
     *   Support potential cross-domain interoperation (e.g., cross the boundary of MPLS domain and non-MPLS domain)
     *   IOAM trace (i.e., the passport mode) is very useful in many realtime measurement/congestion control applications (e.g., HPCC and tons of published research papers), therefore it has great potential for future wider application.



  1.  Do you have other applications of MNA that have not been proposed yet?



[HS] I’d like to see a simple flag-based action to support the postcard mode telemetry.

I’d like also see the support of application level ID and metadata to better support the application-aware networking.



 This poll will close in two weeks, at 9am PDT, Aug 13.



Regards,

MPLS chairs