IETF Logo Mail Archive

[OPSAWG] draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport

Thomas.Graf@swisscom.com Tue, 19 March 2024 00:41 UTC

Return-Path: <Thomas.Graf@swisscom.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5CD4C14F61A; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 17:41:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=swisscom.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0PafiHW-pxRj; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 17:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.swisscom.com (mailout110.swisscom.com [138.188.166.110]) (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 24E74C14F5F6; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 17:40:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.swisscom.com; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 01:40:52 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=swisscom.com; s=iscm; t=1710808852; bh=acGueah8Kr5iiW7vNBssSzpYbk2IZmPo6FuqSk/aww4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date; b=sm8lLPkxb2EBR2hdL0kAVx0Mx4GbYU/cf0sk1eGLN4OnU+6IqHr+3KNr6z7r7z/kW 2j9tsayruNB7I4n31QwliQF3CrHUpGYfnG3OWm9AvRq+igoiJHyPDwd3ve9I+7WBWp qyUP4jrS02k/nVTw1KGXeVui7QqMrNSPkFqYXCfvwKMbx6XaXFOH04OzoOvaMJesga NguAZdSaGSuFlET7r0M3rFN8XLNmmOQJa9qpIOIoTLMHL5RQ1cnsCnaPKiE61SG2hC 5nl35JMz/1t/sPcqw9KUeoaCn1In15iotP470Ov5gfXNuz9/Ag/APjhnf7BoZPlr5A hKpjlqOIhhGXQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="----=_Part_2182160_349084372.1710808851707"
X-Mailer: Totemo_TrustMail_(Notification)
From: Thomas.Graf@swisscom.com
To: ippm@ietf.org, opsawg@ietf.org, justin.iurman@uliege.be
Thread-Topic: draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport
Thread-Index: Adp5k6jXQyeYOkNbS/SPBXtiq8UoSw==
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 00:40:48 +0000
Message-ID: <7192bc432d5d47aa89e7ced33ff4cc84@swisscom.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, de-CH
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_2e1fccfb-80ca-4fe1-a574-1516544edb53_ActionId=45e23629-9e3f-4f79-873c-455d3a785a47; MSIP_Label_2e1fccfb-80ca-4fe1-a574-1516544edb53_ContentBits=0; MSIP_Label_2e1fccfb-80ca-4fe1-a574-1516544edb53_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_2e1fccfb-80ca-4fe1-a574-1516544edb53_Method=Standard; MSIP_Label_2e1fccfb-80ca-4fe1-a574-1516544edb53_Name=C2 Internal; MSIP_Label_2e1fccfb-80ca-4fe1-a574-1516544edb53_SetDate=2024-03-19T00:15:23Z; MSIP_Label_2e1fccfb-80ca-4fe1-a574-1516544edb53_SiteId=364e5b87-c1c7-420d-9bee-c35d19b557a1;
x-originating-ip: [138.188.161.184]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Trustmail: processed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/CLErfURnogwsCLTJ4n6aAgBti0g>
Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 00:41:27 -0000

Dear Justin, Dear OPSAWG and IPPM working groups

Thanks a lot for the presentation at IPPM. I believe that this work needs further refinement by defining also IPFIX entities for IOAM which allow a decomposition of each IOAM dimension fields, thus enabling IPFIX Flow Aggregation as described in RFC 7015 which is a requirement to scale out for IOAM DEX and Trace Option Type. I believe this should be performed after the working group adoption and me should move forward quickly since IOAM is now getting implemented by vendors and applied by operators.

While shepherding IPFIX at OPSAWG, I noticed that most discussions where around choosing the right data type and aligning with the IPFIX registry. Not so much about exposing the right dimensions from the data plane.

draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry is already adopted and well progressed at OPSAWG. I suggest that draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport is being adopted together with draft-gfz-opsawg-ipfix-alt-mark. With that we are covering both Hybrid Type options developed at IPPM.

In order to pool the IPFIX entity definitions, I believe OPSAWG would be the best place to move with draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport forward.

I would appreciate feedback from IPPM and OPSAWG wherever they share my opinion or not.

Best wishes
Thomas

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email