Dear Chaitana,
If finally read the draft.
You mentioned:
There is an existing IE 89 - forwardingStatus[IANA-IPFIX
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix>]but it allows a very
limited number of exceptions to be reported from the system (6-bit
reason code)
But at the same time, you just present a couple of entries in your table 3
+----------------+--------------------------------------------------+ |
Forwarding | Reason | | Exception Code | |
+----------------+--------------------------------------------------+ |
1 | FIREWALL_DISCARD | | 2 | TTL_EXPIRY | | 3 | DISCARD_ROUTE | | 4 |
BAD_IPV4_CHECKSUM | | 5 | REJECT_ROUTE | | 6 | BAD_IPV4_HEADER (Version
incorrect or IHL < 5)| | 7 | BAD_IPV6_HEADER (Version incorrect) | | 8 |
BAD_IPV4_HEADER_LENGTH (V4 frame is too short) | | 9 |
BAD_IPV6_HEADER_LENGTH | | 10 | BAD_IPV6_OPTIONS_PACKET(too many option
headers) | | .. | .. |
+----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
Table 3: Forwarding Status Codes
If I look at the series of Dropped Reason for IPFIX IE ForwardingStatus,
at https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml#forwarding-status,
this list is even more complete.
Binary Hex Description Reference
10 000000b 0x80 Unknown [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 000001b 0x81 ACL deny [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 000010b 0x82 ACL drop [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 000011b 0x83 Unroutable [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 000100b 0x84 Adjacency [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 000101b 0x85 Fragmentation and DF set [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 000110b 0x86 Bad header checksum [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 000111b 0x87 Bad total Length [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 001000b 0x88 Bad header length [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 001001b 0x89 bad TTL [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 001010b 0x8A Policer [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 001011b 0x8B WRED [RFC7270 <https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 001100b 0x8C RPF [RFC7270 <https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 001101b 0x8D For us [RFC7270 <https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 001110b 0x8E Bad output interface [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
10 001111b 0x8F Hardware [RFC7270
<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc7270>]
0x90-0xBF Unassigned
Status 11b: Consumed
If this list is not complete, we should update it with some additional
drop reasons, as opposed to define yet a new overlapping IPFIX IE...
Especially at the time where we try to clean up the IPFIX registry.
Note: I know of at least two vendors that implemented forwardingStatus.
Regarding forwardingNextHopID, we already have a series of
nexthop-related IPFIX IE. As a matter of fact, even the IPv4 and IPv6
are different IPFIX IEs in the IANA registry (whether this is right or
wrong is irrelevant, that was a decision taken years ago)
Therefore, I am afraid I can't support WG adoption of this draft.
Regards, Benoit
On 11/6/2023 3:56 PM, Venkata Naga Chaitanya Munukutla wrote:
Hello OPSAWG experts,
We've posted version v08 for IPFIX Extensions for Forwarding
Exceptions (minor editorial changes).
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mvmd-opsawg-ipfix-fwd-exceptions/08/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mvmd-opsawg-ipfix-fwd-exceptions/08/>
The document has been stable for a while and we believe it is
sufficiently baked to be considered for WG adoption. The last time we
presented this draft (IETF116), there seemed to be a reasonable amount
of interest in the work (as captured in the meeting notes
--https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-116-opsawg
<https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-116-opsawg>).
We would like to invite more feedback on this document and also
formally request WG adoption.
Thanks,
Chaitanya (on behalf of co-authors/contributors)
Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
