Hi Authors,
The draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm-01 defines a new C flag as following:
3.1.2.1. Loss Measurement Flags
An LM message carries Data Format Flags (DFlags) as defined in
[RFC6374]. New Flag is defined in this document for Color (C) in the
DFlags field as follows.
+-+-+-+-+
|X|B|C|0|
+-+-+-+-+
Data Format Flags
The Flag C indicates the Color of the counters in the LM probe
message [RFC6374] when using Alternate-Marking method defined in
[RFC8321].
-------------
As defined in Section 4.2 of [RFC8321], could you consider to define more than
one flag or a TLV to carry Block number instead?
Best regards,
Mach
From: ippm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 9:57 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ippm] New Draft draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm
Hi WG,
We like to introduce following new draft that was presented to SPRING WG
yesterday.
This draft defines IP/UDP path for sending probe query messages for delay and
loss measurement that is agnostics to data plane (SR-MPLS/SRv6/IP) and does not
require to bootstrap PM session.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm/
You may find presentation in the following package (it is the second draft).
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-spring-13-performance-measurement-in-sr-networks-00
We welcome your comments and suggestions.
Thanks,
Rakesh (On behalf of authors and contributors)
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
