Re: [Pals] [mpls] draft-zzhang-intarea-generic-delivery-functions

Hi Stewart,
Thanks for your comments. If we have a mechanism like following, does that
address the issue?

   1. IOAM header is part of the MPLS encapsulation, any other control word
   is added after the IOAM header in the data packet.
   2. The transit nodes can process the IOAM data field(s) after the EOS in
   data packets as it is proposed.
   3. The decapsulating node removes the MPLS encapsulation including the
   IOAM header and then processes the other control word following it.

   0                   1                   2                   3

   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   | IOAM Indicator Label                  | TC  |1|  TTL          |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+

   |0 0 0 1|Version| Reserved      | IOAM G-ACh                    |  |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  |

   | Reserved      | Block Number  | IOAM-OPT-Type |IOAM HDR Length|  |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  I

   |                                                               |  O

   |                                                               |  A

   ~                 IOAM Option and Data Space                    ~  M

   |                                                               |  |

   |                                                               |  |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+

   |0 0 0 0| Rsved | This Header   | Header Length | Next Header   |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   ~              Variable field per “This header”                 ~

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                                                               |

   |                                                               |

   ~                 Payload Packet                                ~

   |                                                               |

   |                                                               |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 10:00 AM Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you Jeffery
>
> Please see the note that I sent about iOAM who also want to sit after BoS
> … and both of you want the same space that PALS and DetNet is already using.
>
> We plan to have a joint session on this hosted by PALS at the next IETF,
> but I think we also need to include the iOAM people.
>
> This has scope to get very messy as we find new candidates for BoS
> metadata so we really need to take a holistic position to ensure the future
> health the MPLS protocol.
>
> - Stewart
>
>
> > On 12 Jan 2021, at 14:27, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just posted
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-intarea-generic-delivery-functions/
> .
> >
> > The initial version was posted to the tsvwg (
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zzhang-tsvwg-generic-transport-functions-00).
> After discussions/feedback we are re-homing it to intarea wg. This new
> version also contains quite some changes based on the comments and feedback
> that we received (special thanks to Stewart).
> >
> > Comments and suggestions are appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Jeffrey
> >
> > Juniper Business Use Only
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>