From nobody Mon Jun 21 14:19:37 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A29D53A1A19; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 14:19:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.885 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.885 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=Y05rxKD1; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=mmYYRHYf 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 Y84xKZGO3XE2; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 14:19:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E22833A1A12; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 14:19:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=19771; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1624310369; x=1625519969; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=Z9sbdxKWaRsvisDLfDMbOtjGq8j1WX5RkRpmefRZjXw=; b=Y05rxKD1qXz2PtVY6gWhm6wB5nqS3OiPrc3VMaN+0okGHFPpOimvF7Jj 69Ds1oMg6mrmxphyjD7FIk7v+iTK+ax84cuHG1bPW+7gJ0tYMlr5Ri6fg z3i/nOJOwv650PgYMa8QOWVUaMD/NvKDWhnHurFdK1dT2D54iSFcU6XgN 0=; X-IPAS-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0A2AgCCAdFgl4YNJK1XAxYIAQELEgxAgUwLgSMwIy5+W?= =?us-ascii?q?hMkMQMIiAUDhTmIbwOKS49SgS4UgREDVAsBAQENAQEqAQkLAgQBAYFzghlEA?= =?us-ascii?q?oJtAiU0CQ4CBAEBAQEDAgMBAQEBBQEBBQEBAQIBBgQUAQEBAQEBAQFohWgNh?= =?us-ascii?q?kUBAQEEAQEQCxATAQEsCwEPAgEIBwcDAwECCRsEByEFAQsUCQgBAQQBDQQBC?= =?us-ascii?q?BMHgkoEAQGBflcDLwEOP5gXAYE6AoofeIE0gQGCBwEBBgQEgTQBAwIOQYMwA?= =?us-ascii?q?woLgjEJgTqCe4QMhmMnHIFJRIEVQ4JgPoIgQgEBAQEBF4EIBAUBEgEHHB4BD?= =?us-ascii?q?AkICYMGgi6CLyVMAQZdBCINIgEBBR0NFxEEbwwDBAEGHRFSEJEeIosgjSGQd?= =?us-ascii?q?zFbCoMfihSIA4YMhXQSg16LJ5ZthneMZYF8jB6DKZAhhFoCBAIEBQIOAQEGg?= =?us-ascii?q?SMxOQ9ccHAVO4JpCQo9FwIOjX0iDA0JFRiDIYUUhUpzAgEBATMCBgoBAQMJf?= =?us-ascii?q?IsEAYEQAQE?= IronPort-PHdr: A9a23:bXpNHhVepjJJdgwG7FMytH8aKQfV8K3gAWYlg6HPw5pBd62i+9LpO 0mMrflujVqcW4Ld5roEjufNqKnvVCQG5orJq3ENdpFAFnpnwcUblgAtGoiJXEv8KvO5YCkzH cAEX1hgrDm3NEFPE5P4YFvf6nS58T8VHED5Mgx4buT4E4LflYK5zee3rpbSeA5PwjG6ZOAaE Q== IronPort-HdrOrdr: A9a23:Z8N4HqnNZFmNnEQ2roYe0Dc0HgbpDfOqimdD5ihNYBxZY6Wkfp +V/cjzhCWbtN9OYh4dcIi7Sda9qXO1z+8T3WBjB8bdYOCGghroEGgG1+vfKlLbalbDH4JmpM Jdmu1FeaHN5DtB/IbHCWuDYqwdKbC8mcjC74qzvhQdLz2CKZsQkjuRYTzrdHGeMTM2fabRY6 Dsn/avyQDQHUg/X4CePD0oTuLDr9rEmNbNehgdHSMq7wGIkHeB9KP6OwLw5GZcbxp/hZMZtU TVmQ3w4auu99uhzAXH6mPV55NK3PP819p4AtCWgMR9EESvtu/oXvUlZ1SxhkFznAid0idtrD AKmWZ4Ay1H0QKUQohym2q05+Cv6kd015ao8y7ovZKqm72IeNt9MbsauWqcGSGpt3bJe7pHof 92NiuixulqJAKFkyLn69fSURZ20kKyvHo5iOYWy2dSSI0EddZq3MEiFW5uYdw99RjBmcoa+S hVfbfhzecTdUnfY2HSv2FpztDpVnMvHg2eSkxHvsCOyTBZkH1w0kNdnaUk7zg93YN4T4MB6/ XPM6xumr0LRsgKbbhlDONERcesEGTCTR/FLWrXK1X6E6MMPW7LtvfMkfkIDSGRCdQ1Jb4J6d r8uX9jxBoPknPVeISzNcdwg2XwqU2GLEPQI+9llupEhoE= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,289,1616457600"; d="scan'208,217";a="737596829" Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 21 Jun 2021 21:19:28 +0000 Received: from mail.cisco.com (xbe-aln-001.cisco.com [173.36.7.16]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 15LLJSww022176 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 21:19:28 GMT Received: from xfe-aln-005.cisco.com (173.37.135.125) by xbe-aln-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.792.15; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:19:28 -0500 Received: from xfe-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.121) by xfe-aln-005.cisco.com (173.37.135.125) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.792.15; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:19:27 -0500 Received: from NAM02-BN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xfe-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.121) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.792.15 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:19:27 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=LV2QmCbsFAvWmg+uRae+fiKnAle+XH95x7L3l9/mkEk3DwNapZYzAdYrOaL3SNfC27Itwm4Jsr0jDHr9GzGzkICooYzTUT6n1ziGzbPHKjvxRcmGoD35kFo7YmJSqWxo9mmZrTeuPro+mH0fP2gnvDskvIljp9B6K8fAgMqQ8pQmqooBC28uUEP6Zy7pPxHyBUiIViJFpoaYQ9umC+r17SLdqSFe2kkrF6abxlh0qi6Qq/onkgk74XnqA1Zt30pxLfsdAgaf0RxD/nhr9bDIb1iPX0WBTf/R+wFQfPFosRW4HzA2+7xfRsx1rHpebmMUnftp55u6b2GmgAhcLwCbyA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=7Tj8pv5GJf5CjzWhhOf0vn+PJY1jRYk8ryKDsTNPNH8=; b=ISw29qj+/sR9ty7Gzm2glumS+3Rdn+wmFtTbtz3E3tIvM0bTtzh+/cP2uGPydzg1aUvnUELpyXNZaJXsV3rbkkjQDsF8Sf+zeCIUQILmtKP6nrcP5CfaQdQOafzy0WXXOrk7sBT2NhKU+7AEIJ2CKSdw90KyH0ASpiAvIAYo2CkhWMD5hdWYs+E9b6M79OnAaaAskptUbpZUeg7SDNwJINrKQXE2/2cUMlTNcWRNHSdhobbZPgFlwq++fDxKksfsYW9Txn+gzSSf8N/s7U8LEXo3yCHhNaeaUQ6hXvHPWtx7evbpo1JkjhkTn7UXmNjJADXK7aRinIEffdy2sSWkYg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=7Tj8pv5GJf5CjzWhhOf0vn+PJY1jRYk8ryKDsTNPNH8=; b=mmYYRHYfL4Vf+7hMezV3U1upxS3xlJZYUq5t3Q+vq62EswR9BLFTk/J4lfQ6ZJqW98ABGg3htILjXm7/1qy84aGf6WuqvK/vTXJ6L3r1wGfDFLRxELRJiuVlKaofkihDnJK0ro1+h+36FvCmgJwY0KHxDJDD4INi/YSr0eUyjE0= Received: from BL3PR11MB5731.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:352::15) by MN2PR11MB3725.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:f9::23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4242.22; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 21:19:26 +0000 Received: from BL3PR11MB5731.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3d3a:3418:9502:6c5e]) by BL3PR11MB5731.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3d3a:3418:9502:6c5e%3]) with mapi id 15.20.4242.023; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 21:19:26 +0000 From: "Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" To: Gyan Mishra , James Guichard CC: "spring@ietf.org" , "spring-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [spring] WG Adoption Call for https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm-06.txt Thread-Index: AddbmCZ9jb/YEEGBSlWsw0k+nsZyIQHRljiAAQD3UrE= Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 21:19:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US Content-Language: en-CA X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [142.114.143.6] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 0e457701-ce6b-4ad3-614e-08d934fa3fdc x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3725: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BL3PR11MB5731.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(346002)(396003)(366004)(376002)(39860400002)(136003)(86362001)(71200400001)(6506007)(33656002)(26005)(122000001)(38100700002)(186003)(53546011)(7696005)(110136005)(54906003)(316002)(2906002)(166002)(8676002)(966005)(83380400001)(64756008)(66946007)(66446008)(66476007)(5660300002)(52536014)(76116006)(66556008)(4326008)(8936002)(55016002)(478600001)(9686003)(163123001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: =?Windows-1252?Q?ydD35Az3C8IgpU0LTYBrBuBMuuwMWhrsR8YHPLvYNGoe+D0Rqs/yXCsN?= =?Windows-1252?Q?RN0V5KQjlwsuiAUBe9RhtRogX2MI2sfGFBQCYhGEOOZLaiDCa97RsBJT?= =?Windows-1252?Q?i0O6Lm7CM1bzBzE7vpJ/Fhn/ijCmA0mPc7ODGDRbpnkBPa7Ow4y2pRTA?= =?Windows-1252?Q?z7ZkHGXmvlwHjjlJBADQ9K4nh1fbxfJw1uJseH+bSQCdxOmJXjfe0zl1?= =?Windows-1252?Q?lXmCjKTCzv8iC2qzyHLWKlOx+Sv1gIbFspMte9ptMl+m3t4McGW4SMHE?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3P7oRg59X9qa2fBX8WYvcctwuGmvC/4njb2h6g/mTbkWfVpaD38Ai/ih?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Qu7nlh+3orzk/yftvuk3d+dBpTRb3KtZm19v5jq2Eu2qQVqGNHOGgKYw?= =?Windows-1252?Q?BahYKhIhm+inMTOhhwFq0TaSgSQaPA8o3w8p9QAOpqMZKQr56HBDa2fh?= =?Windows-1252?Q?/t77X+G4OLHvLyZQsW9tEVEAq+SljtiRt0BhcFJ+G5Y05nn3joy5/2oQ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?kdzMY2Y0w5YYDXhbgtlb2AFpoHzp4fx1vUsgNpA09aqx25Box61xr3pr?= =?Windows-1252?Q?8ojGmLsec0afR7UGe8oPCibXTlokBoPbikP/hVj1fEW1Wpk1Muf1Vg1w?= =?Windows-1252?Q?yhCLuphNT0gSr59m0inA8Fc2yRErFvxxxHsx8TA1UGnRkVg8/QZc1VSG?= =?Windows-1252?Q?aofFncOrZFVb7DowheRflOOvvWRx5eeaLyRYM+t8/4+jImb0VZR9HVGR?= =?Windows-1252?Q?niAcWtJ4SqJHX0To5KXzFT7Ed/xoENDrS552gOZniaqrNeuK66kRr3jq?= =?Windows-1252?Q?I8FSC1jq9cgexmDaB3ryWJ2ny1tW2fSoK8HRSHfBiwgUBuPBbsDpSMi+?= =?Windows-1252?Q?8nJZSon4hzi9vtsT/uCBGhtHGF2VOJPlIcJIyl/a/FYJorbnya/2o0Vn?= =?Windows-1252?Q?la5yNuj/WOpUafsuk6GQOWmxuakqxo1qDgIZJvMBouByEVYZLby06oSy?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3DuZ9sej7x34rdndAnWW82K10GGCQ7xLRNuZ9ses1oqF1M4y15nh4rrn?= =?Windows-1252?Q?dwfvA70Ln6gEx8zH1OWC0W5K9WSt2njgQj45K+HCnKLEgjmJx7KsDA5S?= =?Windows-1252?Q?9cHvSjvR0xlz7EDS5HsRoCxhQGL+MlA8y5/5Ix143F/K+MVsQqjYxUzU?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Ckkykn24H4e0n6m1BoWjT5DEKbrRq73AM44uo11fszdruy6WfAALufUg?= =?Windows-1252?Q?OALWfTuX6VFfrrJj9xFOCV0xX0TqRAMMiFIwm3UcKiM9Io9LFzqphHPq?= =?Windows-1252?Q?ZZSxNXMJjm8d47zp9t6SueW9mh9HALMqWStZV/M4PZJgnSpjOXN5ahmI?= =?Windows-1252?Q?8fFEDdRDpXovjM+1kehOctqw1lAqmzO+q4oKKb2kR+H65/NpvnsrLRbW?= =?Windows-1252?Q?hf6fPL+XekIduY4RISzbxA=3D=3D?= x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BL3PR11MB5731CC6C909221705B7DE080BF0A9BL3PR11MB5731namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BL3PR11MB5731.namprd11.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0e457701-ce6b-4ad3-614e-08d934fa3fdc X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Jun 2021 21:19:26.7033 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 4sNylhkJYfsRVkkgs3FFJwRo+V4WghYrIWvVAp70qAFC7S+8qKBJ3YTwE+5jNEJAFEE9Cm5je4FJynEMTmXvcQ== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3725 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.16, xbe-aln-001.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-12.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm-06.txt X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 21:19:36 -0000 --_000_BL3PR11MB5731CC6C909221705B7DE080BF0A9BL3PR11MB5731namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks Gyan for your review comments. We will address the comments highlighted in blue in the next revision of th= e document as per reply to Greg=92s email. Thanks, Rakesh From: spring on behalf of Gyan Mishra Date: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 at 2:37 PM To: James Guichard Cc: spring@ietf.org , spring-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/= draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm-06.txt Dear Authors I support WG adoption once the document is updated fixing the critical subs= tantive issues that exist in the draft as it stands today. I have worked Rakesh and authors on feedback on the draft, and as the draft= is well written, I do appreciate that the issues mentioned in previous dis= cussions being incorporated to help improve the draft. This draft was initially on Standards Track and as this draft is procedural= only, reusing existing IPPM OAM framework to apply to SR, Greg Mirksy and = myself requested this draft be changed to Informational. I am happy to see= the authors did follow our comments and recommendations to change to infor= mational. However, for this informational track document to be adopted by the WG, the= substantive issues need to be addressed. As this draft is informational f= rom a procedural standpoint if this draft was not proposed, there is nothin= g preventing STAMP or TWAMP to function over an SR both SR-MPLS or SRv6. By proposing a draft that has substantive issues related to what is being p= roposed procedurally, the question that come to mind is what is the purpose= or benefit to even having this draft given what I stated above that IPPM S= TAMP and TWAMP will work and function fine without this drafts existence. I think the above statement is all the more reasons that it is critical to = get this draft cleaned up prior to WG adoption. This draft PM procedures is in scope for both SR-MPLS and SRv6. This draft is trying to reuse RFC 8762 STAMP for SR, however with the chose= n verbiage describing the mode used, it seems to be changing the way STAMP = operates per specification. If the goal is to use STAMP in this informati= onal context defining a special procedure for SR, this draft cannot alter o= r change the inner workings of STAMP. What is the reason for setting TTL to 1 and not use TTL 255 GTSM defined in= RFC 5082. Also, Section 5 provides a very intriguing statement: This method can be used for inferred packet loss measurement, however, it does not provide accurate data packet loss metric. >From a measurement and performance metics perspective for SR-MPLS as it re= uses the MPLS data plane the preferred method would be to use the entropy l= abel RFC 6790, RFC 8662 for in band native data traffic than using IPv4 as = once the packet is labeled the packet is label switched so using a label wo= uld be in band and in line with the MPLS forwarding plane. All of these questions as well as ones mentioned by Greg Mirsky should be a= ddressed by the authors before this draft can be adopted. Kind Regards Gyan On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 8:34 AM James Guichard > wrote: Dear WG: The IPPM WG has adopted https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ip= pm-stamp-srpm-00 as a WG document. In a previous communication (December 16th 2= 020), the SPRING chairs decided not to adopt https://www.ietf.org/archive/i= d/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm-06.txt into the WG until its companion doc= ument was accepted by the IPPM WG. This has now happened and therefore we f= eel it is now time to revisit the WG adoption of the SPRING document. Due to the lapse of several months since the initial WG adoption call, the = chairs would like to start another 2-week WG adoption call for https://www.= ietf.org/archive/id/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm-06.txt, ending June 21st= 2021. After review of the SPRING document please indicate support (or not) for WG= adoption to the mailing list. Please also provide comments/reasons for tha= t support (or lack thereof) as silence will not be considered as consent. Thanks! Jim, Joel & Bruno _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring -- [Image removed by sender.] Gyan Mishra Network Solutions Architect Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com M 301 502-1347 --_000_BL3PR11MB5731CC6C909221705B7DE080BF0A9BL3PR11MB5731namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks Gyan for your review comments.

We will address the comments highlighted in blue in the next revision of the document as p= er reply to Greg=92s email.

 

Thanks,

Rakesh

 

 

From: spring <spring-b= ounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com><= br> Date: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 at 2:37 PM
To: James Guichard <jguichar@futurewei.com>
Cc: spring@ietf.org <spring@ietf.org>, spring-chairs@ietf.org = <spring-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for https://www.ietf.org/arch= ive/id/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm-06.txt

 

Dear Authors 

 

I support WG adoption once the document is updated f= ixing the critical substantive issues that exist in the draft as it stands = today.  

 

I have worked Rakesh and authors on feedback on the = draft, and as the draft is well written, I do appreciate that the issues me= ntioned in previous discussions being incorporated to help improve the draf= t.

 

This draft was initially on Standards Track and as t= his draft is procedural only, reusing existing IPPM OAM framework to apply = to SR, Greg Mirksy and myself requested this draft be changed to Informatio= nal.  I am happy to see the authors did follow our comments and recommendations to change to informational.

 

However, for this informational track document to be= adopted by the WG, the substantive issues need to be addressed. = As this draft is informational from a procedural standpoint if this draft = was not proposed, there is nothing preventing STAMP or TWAMP to function over an SR both SR-MPLS or SRv6.  

 

By proposing a draft that has substantive issues rel= ated to what is being proposed procedurally, the question that come to mind= is what is the purpose or benefit to even having this draft given what I s= tated above that IPPM STAMP and TWAMP will work and function fine without this drafts existence.  

 

I think the above statement is all the more reasons = that it is critical to get this draft cleaned up prior to WG adoption. &nbs= p;

 

 

This draft PM procedures is in scope for both SR-MPL= S and SRv6.

 

This draft is trying to reuse RFC 8762 STAMP for SR,= however with the chosen verbiage describing the mode used, it seems to be = changing the way STAMP operates per specification.   If the goal is to= use STAMP in this informational context defining a special procedure for SR, this draft cannot alter or change the= inner workings of STAMP.  

 

 

What is the reason for= setting TTL to 1 and not use TTL 255 GTSM defined in RFC 5082.<= /span>

 

Also, Section 5 provides a very intriguing sta= tement:
  This method can be used for inferred packet loss measurement,   however, it does not provide accurate data packet loss metric.<= /span>

 

>From a measurement= and performance metics perspective for SR-MPLS as it reuses the MPLS data = plane the preferred method would be to use the entropy label RFC 6790, RFC = 8662 for in band native data traffic than using IPv4 as once the packet is labeled the packet is label switched so u= sing a label would be in band and in line with the MPLS forwarding plane.

 

All of these questions as well as ones mentioned by = Greg Mirsky should be addressed by the authors before this draft can be ado= pted.

 

Kind Regards 

 

Gyan

 

On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 8:34 AM James Guichard <jguichar@futurewei.com> wrot= e:

Dear WG:

 

The IPPM WG has adopted https://datatracker.ietf.org/do= c/html/draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-srpm-00 as a WG document. In a previous communication (December 16th 20= 20), the SPRING chairs decided not to adopt https://www.ietf.org/archive/= id/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm-06.txt into the WG until its companio= n document was accepted by the IPPM WG. This has now happened and therefore we feel it is now time to revisit the = WG adoption of the SPRING document.

 

Due to the lapse of several months since the = initial WG adoption call, the chairs would like to start another 2-week WG = adoption call for https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm-06.txt, = ending June 21st 2021.

 

After review of the SPRING document please indicate support (or no= t) for WG adoption to the mailing list. Please also provide comments/reason= s for that support (or lack thereof) as silence will not be considered as consent.

 

Thanks!

 

Jim, Joel & Bruno

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org = https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

--

3D"Image

Gyan Mishra=

Network Solutions Architect&nb= sp;

Email gyan.s.mishr= a@verizon.com

M 301 = 502-1347

 

--_000_BL3PR11MB5731CC6C909221705B7DE080BF0A9BL3PR11MB5731namp_--