Hi Gyan, Thank you for your comments! Please see inline for response marked with [HS]
Best, Haoyu From: Gyan Mishra <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2022 9:03 PM To: Tianran Zhou <[email protected]> Cc: Greg Mirsky <[email protected]>; Haoyu Song <[email protected]>; IETF IPPM WG <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [ippm] [spring] Active OAM in SRv6 Hi Haoyu I think it would be good to identify the problem statement and gap with existing IPPM WG STAMP, TWAMP PM technologies and why they cannot be utilized or fall short in what you are trying to achieve with Active OAM in SRv6. [HS] My understanding is that STAMP/TWAMP are for end-to-end measurements, here we want to collect data from every node and every link on any path, without needing to set up any sessions. So the scope and coverage are different. In-situ IOAM data packets is already possible with SRv6 as mentioned as this draft mentions below as normative reference. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-16<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-16&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136005568%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=b6abSWTm77Z4Td%2B0X5hjmZBrFHTe%2FpPdZuWyXNEY3vU%3D&reserved=0> [HS] There's no accepted solution on how to support IOAM in SRv6 yet. Our proposal aims to provide such a solution, and (1) the solution avoids the issues on encapsulating the IOAM trace in EHs and (2) it's extensible to include OAM methods beyond IOAM. This draft as well mentioned as normative reference draft below provides OAM ping and traceroute with SRH O flag to SRv6 PGM endpoints and SID list tracing capabilities very handy for troubleshooting. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-1<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-12&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136005568%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=EnHxos0Nc%2BF3d%2FehCZuIoSswxZ7udPLASp22oW5UES4%3D&reserved=0>3 [HS] This is for in-band OAM for SRv6 user traffic and it only works for triggering postcard exports (i.e., don't allow the packet to carry data). Our proposal support all the IOAM options and more important, it's an active method which means one can generate and inject probing packets to cover arbitrary paths by crafting an SRH. This draft as well also mentioned as normative reference draft below provides in-situ IOAM for OAM and PM information can be piggybacked in data packets in SRH TLV SRv6 PGM SIF function SRv6.TLV recording the operational and telemetry info in the data packets. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ali-spring-ioam-srv6-05<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ali-spring-ioam-srv6-05&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136005568%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=9zM0yFTsl2jKvDDd8uDv0rtGcOsoaKY%2FEaqUXZmsJ5U%3D&reserved=0> [HS] This draft proposes to encapsulate IOAM in SRH TLV. Due to the overhead concern (IOAM trace could be large) and other issues related to EH, I don't support such a solution. [HS] The three drafts you mentioned are all be reference in our draft and discussed. We think our use cases are different and our approach is more general and extensible to our use cases. Thanks Gyan On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:19 PM Tianran Zhou <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Haoyu, The application is really interesting and useful. I am not sure if it is necessary to create a new OAM protocol at transport layer. IMHO, a per hop/per segment extension based on STAMP could be more practical. https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-03.txt<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Farchive%2Fid%2Fdraft-wang-ippm-stamp-hbh-extensions-03.txt&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136005568%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=zqVhnbQoOc33My8fwqES5arm9vT0NCeUs3kIIkGPlug%3D&reserved=0> Best, Tianran From: ippm [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Greg Mirsky Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 7:01 AM To: Haoyu Song <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; IETF IPPM WG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [ippm] [spring] Active OAM in SRv6 Hi Haoyu, thank you for bringing the topic of Active OAM to the discussion. As the concept of Active IOAM is introduced in the IPPM WG draft<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136161714%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=5rsC694oCufl11dAM4pfiB%2FIKazRSNV3KWAmY%2B7hReA%3D&reserved=0> it seems to me like adding the IPPM WG community to the discussion is the right thing to do. Please find my notes in-lined below under the GIM>> tag. Regards, Greg On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 2:37 PM Haoyu Song <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi SPRING WG, Real time monitor on every node and every link on a network is necessary to detect gray failures, which are the key culprit for poor QoS but hard to catch. SR provides an ideal mechanism, when working with some efficient planning algorithm, to achieve that with low cost. Our proposal SRv6 In-situ Active Measurement (SIAM) suggests a simple active measurement approach which can support different GIM>> I wonder what gaps you find in the existing active measurement protocols, e.g., STAMP and RFC 6734 (would be more convenient to use an acronym). It appears to me that, for example, STAMP and its extensions, including the SRPM draft<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-ippm-stamp-srpm&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136161714%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=nbxsguDj1bZHDKu2RkvdBkOUxvrXeY%2F5Vlc5jBj2qgE%3D&reserved=0>, comprehensively address the PM OAM requirements for SRv6. options of IOAM and other OAM methods in SRv6, without needing to worry about the extension header issue. GIM>> draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data classifies IOAM as follows: In terms of the classification given in [RFC7799] IOAM could be portrayed as Hybrid Type 1. Does your proposal change that? Your comments, questions, and suggestions are very welcome. I'd like to know your opinion if you think this work is in scope and should be adopted by the working group. If you are interested in contributing to this work, please also let me know. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-song-spring-siam/<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-song-spring-siam%2F&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136161714%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=aV3fE%2BZWpaILCWRLJQEo98%2FZ65gN5U%2FIR%2BJdyFHQjyU%3D&reserved=0> Thank you very much! Best regards, Haoyu _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fspring&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136161714%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=6l%2F90vtnx7lbNsKu5RwYBBqjS5M4D%2BD6KhaiHSZpjVs%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fippm&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136161714%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=OntVxXeEzhGZ8G%2B00zHbhdCc9b1%2ByhJp9inqWabEVo0%3D&reserved=0> -- [http://ss7.vzw.com/is/image/VerizonWireless/vz-logo-email]<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.verizon.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cd997fc19042a43dad96e08d9e152596a%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637788566136161714%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=UZoeWsVHOHCoe8ZCPdcr7yf930qNAFZMli9E3H02WY0%3D&reserved=0> Gyan Mishra Network Solutions Architect Email [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> M 301 502-1347
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
