Re: [nvo3] What needs to be done about OAM?

Hi Anoop,
thank you for the most detailed list of the references to OAM work related
to NVO3 WG. I may add just couple more drafts that came out of OOAM design
team:

   - requirements
   <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-requirement-02>;
   - gap analysis
   <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-oam-gap-analysis-02>;
   - OOAM heade
   <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-header/>r;
   - on-demand Echo Request/Reply
   <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-demand-cc-cv-03>.

The NVO3 OAM design team, at some point in time, joined in work with OOAM
DT and input, expertise helped us significantly.

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:29 PM, Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>
wrote:

> This is a more recent version:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ashwood-nvo3-oam-requirements-04
>
> See also these drafts:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tissa-nvo3-oam-fm-04
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-singh-nvo3-vxlan-router-alert-02
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nordmark-nvo3-transcending-traceroute-03
>
> IIRC, there was an NVO3 OAM design team that was formed and we met
> virtually at least a couple of times and then the effort died off.
>
> Then there was another effort around OAM for overlays in the RTGWG.
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-requirement-02
>
> And finally, BFD over VXLAN:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-00
>
> I haven't been following stuff closely, so I may have missed some related
> work.
>
> Thanks,
> Anoop
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
> matthew.bocci@nokia.com> wrote:
>
>> Dale
>>
>> There was a draft on OAM requirements in the working group a few years
>> ago, but this somewhat fell by the wayside.
>>
>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ashwood-nvo3-operation
>> al-requirement-03.txt
>>
>> It may be a good time for an interested participant to pick this up again.
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>> On 06/04/2018, 02:58, "nvo3 on behalf of Dale R. Worley" <
>> nvo3-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of worley@ariadne.com> wrote:
>>
>>     My apologies, but I'm new here.  There has been various discussion
>> about
>>     OAM packets, but what I've seen has been fairly vague -- the O bit in
>>     Geneve and a proposal for an OAM encapsulation that was not detailed
>>     about what application-level information the encapsulation would
>> carry.
>>
>>     Is there solid information about what OAM is to achieve and what is
>>     necessary to achieve it?  Or is that a discussion that we really need
>> to
>>     have?
>>
>>     I can see various different ways of opening up the subject.  One is to
>>     show clearly useful implementations, and from that, start to abstract
>>     the functions that they perform.  Conversely, we can show functions
>> for
>>     which there is a need, and start to work out implementations.
>>
>>     Dale
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     nvo3 mailing list
>>     nvo3@ietf.org
>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nvo3 mailing list
>> nvo3@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> nvo3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>
>