[mpls] WG: New Version Notification for draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report-00.txt

<Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de> Thu, 23 June 2016 07:05 UTC

Return-Path: <Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4792012DF2E; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.646
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.646 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rrqGUiDuocRS; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:05:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tcmail13.telekom.de (tcmail13.telekom.de []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49E3F12DF35; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:05:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from qdezc2.de.t-internal.com ([]) by tcmail11.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 23 Jun 2016 09:05:16 +0200
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,515,1459807200"; d="scan'208";a="479329515"
Received: from he101654.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([]) by qde0ps.de.t-internal.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Jun 2016 09:05:14 +0200
Received: from HE101653.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ( by HE101654.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:05:13 +0200
Received: from HE101653.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::8954:80af:2020:572c]) by HE101653.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::8954:80af:2020:572c%27]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:05:13 +0200
From: <Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de>
To: <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, <jgs@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHRzROgro7PGjkLl0G/wd6SmPRqu5/2nFNQ
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 07:05:13 +0000
Message-ID: <98ec3cd7d56a436f90e98f05231f8221@HE101653.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/Yw-o6zpo-3ZiJCi9HQkNkkqLFR8>
Cc: mpls@ietf.org, spring@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] WG: New Version Notification for draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report-00.txt
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 07:05:23 -0000

Hi Bruno, hi John,

the draft below reports on an implementation of an MPLS Path Monitoring System. The PMS is using stacked transport labels as a SPRING router will do. The MPLS topology learned by the PMS is an LDP one. That's why I copied the message to the MPLS WG (I'm not on the MPLS mailing list - if there are comments and questions, please discuss on SPRING or reply to me directly).

Finally, I copy the message to IPPM WG. The MPLS PMS captures the Round-Trip Delay metric. RTD measurements and of the MPLS PMS are compared to those of an IPPM implementation in the draft.

Regards, Ruediger 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juni 2016 07:54
An: Geib, Rüdiger; Leipnitz, Raik
Betreff: New Version Notification for draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report-00.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Raik Leipnitz and posted to the IETF repository.

Name:		draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report
Revision:	00
Title:		A scalable and topology aware MPLS data plane monitoring system
Document date:	2016-06-22
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		22
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report-00.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report-00

   This document reports round-trip delay measurements captured by a
   single MPLS Path Monitoring System (PMS) compared with results of an
   IPPM conformant measurement system, consisting of three different
   Measurement Agents.  The measurements were made in a research
   backbone with an LDP control plane.  The packets of the MPLS PMS use
   label stacks similar to those to be used by a segment routing MPLS
   PMS.  The measurement packets of the MPLS PMS remained in the network
   data plane.


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat