%% You should probably cite draft-fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark-10 instead of this revision. @techreport{fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark-09, number = {draft-fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark-09}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark/09/}, author = {Giuseppe Fioccola and Tianran Zhou and Mauro Cociglio and Gyan Mishra and xuewei wang and Geng Zhang}, title = {{Application of the Alternate Marking Method to the Segment Routing Header}}, pagetotal = 18, year = , month = , day = , abstract = {The Alternate Marking Method is a passive performance measurement method based on marking consecutive batches of packets, which can be used to measure packet loss, latency, and jitter of live traffic. This method requires a packet marking method so that packet flows can be distinguished and identified. A mechanism to carry suitable packet marking in the Hop-by-Hop Header and the Destination Options Header of an IPv6 packet is described in RFC 9343 and is also applicable to Segment Routing for IPv6 (SRv6). This document describes an alternative approach that uses a new TLV in the Segment Routing Header (SRH) of an SRv6 packet. This approach has been implemented and has potential scaling and simplification benefits over the technique described in RFC 9343. This protocol extension has been developed outside the IETF and is published here to guide implementation, ensure interoperability among implementations, and enable wide-scale deployment to determine the potential benefits of this approach.}, }