[sfc] Fw: I-D Action: draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-13.txt

gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com Thu, 17 June 2021 00:21 UTC

Return-Path: <gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com>
X-Original-To: sfc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sfc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0B273A0E5A; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 17:21:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 f6PxrMJlquFk; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 17:21:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxus.zteusa.com (mxus.zteusa.com [4.14.134.162]) (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 6636A3A0E5B; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 17:21:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mse-us.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.36.11.29]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 95112D5CC16252303741; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 08:21:42 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mgapp01.zte.com.cn ([10.36.9.142]) by mse-us.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 15H0LcL4087479; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 08:21:38 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com)
Received: from mapi (mgapp02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid81; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 08:21:38 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 08:21:38 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa60ca9592be369580
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202106170821386290599@zte.com.cn>
References: 162387261686.18358.6605999783194926208@ietfa.amsl.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com
To: sfc@ietf.org, sfc-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-us.zte.com.cn 15H0LcL4087479
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sfc/u7TrU3WGT77-lVojxtwadYnipbI>
Subject: [sfc] Fw: I-D Action: draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-13.txt
X-BeenThere: sfc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Service Chaining <sfc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sfc>, <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sfc/>
List-Post: <mailto:sfc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc>, <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 00:21:52 -0000

Dear All,
updates in this version result from the discussion with Med (lots of thanks and my sincere appreciation, Med).
The authors believe that the document is much closer to be ready for the WG LC now. Please read it. Your comments are most welcome.
In the discussion, a question came up: What could be the best way to handle two individual drafts (draft-ao-sfc-oam-return-path-specified and draft-ao-sfc-oam-path-consistency)? These drafts define extensions of the SFC Echo Request/Reply protocol addressing several of the requirements listed in Section 3 of draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam. It was also suggested that the substantive part of these drafts be merged into the Active SFC OAM specification. We've asked the question and received several responses. Authors much appreciate the WG Chairs opinion on the proposed merge of the named drafts.

Regards,
Greg Mirsky
Sr. Standardization Expert
预研标准部/有线研究院/有线产品经营部  Standard Preresearch Dept./Wireline Product R&D Institute/Wireline Product Operation Division
E: gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com
www.zte.com.cn
------------------Original Mail------------------
Sender: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org ;
CC: sfc@ietf.org;
Date: 2021/06/16 12:44
Subject: [sfc] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-13.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Service Function Chaining WG of the IETF.
Title           : Active OAM for Service Function Chaining
Authors         : Greg Mirsky
Wei Meng
Bhumip Khasnabish
Cui Wang
Filename        : draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-13.txt
Pages           : 27
Date            : 2021-06-16
Abstract:
A set of requirements for active Operation, Administration, and
Maintenance (OAM) of Service Function Chains (SFCs) in a network is
presented in this document.  Based on these requirements, an
encapsulation of active OAM messages in SFC and a mechanism to detect
and localize defects are described.
This document updates RFC 8300.  Particularly, it updates the
definition of O (OAM) bit in the Network Service Header (NSH) (RFC
8300) and defines how an active OAM message is identified in the NSH.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam/
There is also an HTML version available at:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-13.html
A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-13
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
_______________________________________________
sfc mailing list
sfc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc