[mpls] Re: WG last call: draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-sr

Hi Xiao Min,

Thank you for the review comments.

Please see replies inline with <RG>...

On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 4:24 AM <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
> I've read the latest version of the draft, which introduces two new TLVs -
> Return Path TLV and Block Number TLV.
>
> With regard to the Return Path TLV, its usage is clear to me, RFC 9503
> defines a similar STAMP TLV extension.
>
> However, to the Block Number TLV, its usage is not clear to me. The first
> paragraph of section 7.2 seems to combine this TLV with Alternate-Marking
> Method defined in RFC 9341, though I can't figure out how they're combined.
>

<RG> RFC 9341, Section 3.1, first paragraph defines packet loss measurement
using block number (copied text below).

   "The basic idea is to virtually split traffic flows into consecutive
   blocks: each block represents a measurable entity unambiguously
   recognizable by all network devices along the path.  By counting the
   number of packets in each block and comparing the values measured by
   different network devices along the path, it is possible to measure
   if packet loss occurred in any single block between any two points."

<RG> This draft defines Block number TLV to carry the above block number
associated with the traffic counters.

   "The packet loss measurement using Alternate-Marking Method defined in
   [RFC9341] MAY use Block Number (BN) for data correlation for the data
   traffic flow under measurement.  To be able to correlate the transmit
   and receive traffic counters of the matching Block Number, the Block
   Number of the traffic counters is carried in the LM query and
   response messages."

*<RG> How about updating the text as follows?*

* "The packet loss measurement using Alternate-Marking Method defined in
   [RFC9341] is based on dividing the traffic flow into consecutive
blocks and   counting the number of packets in each block. A block
number is used to *

*   identify the transmit and receive counters in each block and
compare for measuring loss.*

*   The LM query and response messages carry the transmit and receive
counters along with the  *

*   block number when using the AMM defined in [RFC9341] for loss measurement."*

Thanks,

Rakesh

> Best Regards,
>
> Xiao Min
> Original
> *From: *TonyLi <tony.li@tony.li>
> *To: *mpls <mpls@ietf.org>;
> *Date: *2024年04月30日 23:52
> *Subject: **[mpls] WG last call: draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-sr*
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>
> [WG chair hat: on]
>
> Hi all,
>
> This starts a 2 week working group last call on
> draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-sr.
>
> This last call ends at 12:01PM PDT, Tues. May 14th.
>
> Please send all comments to the mailing list.
>
> Thanks,
> Tony
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list -- mpls@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to mpls-leave@ietf.org
>