[mpls] Multiplexed Marking in draft-bryant-mpls-rfc6374-sfl

Tal Mizrahi <talmi@marvell.com> Thu, 17 November 2016 07:17 UTC

Return-Path: <talmi@marvell.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3B441295AF; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:17:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OnBHK3xCr5sU; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:17:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com (mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com [67.231.156.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E28C1295B4; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:17:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0045851.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id uAH7FVg8011683; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:17:34 -0800
Received: from il-exch02.marvell.com ([199.203.130.102]) by mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 26rr3munmf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:17:34 -0800
Received: from IL-EXCH01.marvell.com (10.4.102.220) by IL-EXCH02.marvell.com (10.4.102.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:17:32 +0200
Received: from IL-EXCH01.marvell.com ([fe80::5d63:81cd:31e2:fc36]) by IL-EXCH01.marvell.com ([fe80::5d63:81cd:31e2:fc36%20]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:17:32 +0200
From: Tal Mizrahi <talmi@marvell.com>
To: "stewart.bryant@gmail.com" <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "'ippm@ietf.org'" <ippm@ietf.org>, "draft-bryant-mpls-rfc6374-sfl@tools.ietf.org" <draft-bryant-mpls-rfc6374-sfl@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Multiplexed Marking in draft-bryant-mpls-rfc6374-sfl
Thread-Index: AdJAoQo4z12hm+yYQH+GnUjrpdgkXA==
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 07:17:31 +0000
Message-ID: <69689c3967554a698d93d1010e479d7f@IL-EXCH01.marvell.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [199.203.130.14]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_69689c3967554a698d93d1010e479d7fILEXCH01marvellcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2016-11-17_04:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1609300000 definitions=main-1611170136
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/umPmP_mYE2rAAXAgmxhjGQMblKo>
Subject: [mpls] Multiplexed Marking in draft-bryant-mpls-rfc6374-sfl
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, 17 Nov 2016 07:17:38 -0000

Hi,

Today at the MPLS WG meeting I suggested that the multiplexed marking concept that was presented in IPPM (see link below) can be applied to draft-bryant-mpls-rfc6374-sfl. Using this multiplexing approach, the number of SFLs used for measurement can potentially be reduced from 3 or 4 labels to just 2 labels. Note that the assumption in the multiplexed marking draft is that you can use a guard-band period between the start time of the loss measurement window, and the start time of the delay measurement.

Here is a link to the multiplexed marking draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mizrahi-ippm-multiplexed-alternate-marking/

Any feedback about the multiplexed marking draft, and about its applicability to MPLS will be welcome.
I will be happy to discuss this further.

Cheers,
Tal.