Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) Extensions for Residual Bit Error Rate Measurement
draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-04

IPPM Working Group                                        R. Gandhi, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                       Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track                          P. Schoenmaker
Expires: 18 May 2026                                Meta Platforms, Inc.
                                                                R. Foote
                                                                   Nokia
                                                        14 November 2025

   Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) Extensions for
                  Residual Bit Error Rate Measurement
                     draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-ber-04

Abstract

   The Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP), as defined in
   RFC 8762, along with its optional extensions specified in RFC 8972,
   can be utilized for active measurement.  Networks may experience
   transmission bit errors due to various factors, including poor fiber
   quality.  Even with efficient CRC and FEC mechanisms, some bit errors
   may escape detection and correction, referred to as residual bit
   errors.  This document further augments the STAMP extensions
   specified in RFC 8972 to enable the measurement of residual bit error
   rate within the "Extra Padding" TLV of STAMP packets.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 18 May 2026.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.3.  STAMP Reference Topology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Bit Errors in Non-measurement Fields of STAMP . . . . . .   5
   4.  STAMP Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  STAMP Session-Sender  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       4.1.1.  Considerations for Bit Pattern  . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  STAMP Session-Reflector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.2.1.  STAMP TLV Conformant Check  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.3.  Considerations for Link Aggregation Group . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  STAMP Extensions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.1.  Bit Pattern in Padding STAMP TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.2.  Bit Error Count in Padding STAMP TLV  . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  Data Model Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     6.1.  Configuration Data Model Parameters . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     6.2.  Operational Data Model Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13

1.  Introduction

   The Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) is designed to
   measure various performance metrics in IP networks without relying on
   a control channel to pre-signal session parameters, as specified in
   [RFC8762].  STAMP test packets are sent between a Session-Sender and
   a Session-Reflector to measure delay and packet loss along the path.

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

   [RFC8972] introduces optional extensions for STAMP in the form of
   Type-Length-Value (TLV) objects, including the capability to transmit
   "Extra Padding" TLV within STAMP test packets.

   Networks may experience transmission bit errors due to various
   factors, such as poor fiber quality, thereby corrupting packets.  The
   bit error can be a single bit error or a burst of bit errors at a
   time.  The bit errors in the received packets can be detected using
   Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC).  The packets with the CRC checksum
   failures may be dropped or corrected using Forward Error Correction
   (FEC).  Even with efficient CRC and FEC mechanisms, some bit errors
   may escape detection and correction, referred to as residual bit
   errors.  These bit errors result in upper-layer (such as UDP or TCP)
   checksum failures and packet drops.  It is beneficial to measure the
   Residual Bit Error Rate (BER) using active measurement packets
   between two nodes to detect service degradation.  For accurate BER
   measurement, transmitting large-sized active measurement packets is
   preferable, especially on links with low bit error rates.
   Furthermore, there is a need to transmit test packets at a high rate
   to measure BER on high-capacity links.

   The STAMP test packets use a UDP header with a checksum field that
   can be used for checking the integrity of the header and payload
   data.  The UDP checksum is optional for the IPv4 header.  The UDP
   checksum may be set to 0 (to bypass the UDP check) for IPv4 and IPv6
   headers for the STAMP destination UDP port.  However, the checksum
   field does not provide an accurate measurement of bit errors.

   Authenticated mode provides data integrity protection for the STAMP
   test packets by adding a Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC),
   such as HMAC-SHA-256 [RFC8762].  However, the authenticated mode does
   not provide an accurate measurement of bit errors.  In addition, the
   HMAC TLV defined in [RFC8972] for authenticating STAMP TLVs does not
   include checking the "Extra Padding" TLV.

   This document further augments the STAMP extensions defined in
   [RFC8972] to enable the measurement of residual bit error rate within
   the "Extra Padding" TLV of STAMP packets.

2.  Conventions Used in This Document

2.1.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 3]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

2.2.  Abbreviations

   BER: Bit Error Rate

   CRC: Cyclic Redundancy Check

   FEC: Forward Error Correction

   MTU: Maximum Transmission Unit

   STAMP: Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol

   TLV: Type-Length-Value

2.3.  STAMP Reference Topology

   In the STAMP reference topology shown in Figure 1, the STAMP Session-
   Sender S1 initiates Session-Sender test packets, and the STAMP
   Session-Reflector R1 transmits reply Session-Reflector test packets.

   T1 is a transmit timestamp, and T4 is a receive timestamp added by
   node S1.  T2 is a receive timestamp, and T3 is a transmit timestamp
   added by node R1.

                     T1                             T2
                    /                                 \
           +-------+    Test Packet                   +-------+
           |       | - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - ->|       |
           |   S1  |==================================|   R1  |
           |       |<- - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - |       |
           +-------+            Reply Test Packet     +-------+
                    \                                /
                    T4                             T3

     STAMP Session-Sender                     STAMP Session-Reflector

                     Figure 1: STAMP Reference Topology

3.  Overview

   The optional extensions for STAMP test packets [RFC8762] are defined
   in [RFC8762] in the form of TLVs.  The Session-Sender transmits
   optional STAMP TLVs, and the Session-Reflector reflects all received
   STAMP TLVs from the Session-Sender test packets.  [RFC8972] defines
   an optional TLV extension specifically for transmitting "Extra
   Padding" (Type=1) TLV in the STAMP test packets.  The "Extra Padding"
   TLV can be filled using either a predefined fixed pattern or a random
   pattern of bits [RFC8972].

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 4]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

   This document defines a procedure to measure residual BER within the
   "Extra Padding" TLV.  The process involves the Session-Sender
   transmitting the extra padding filled with a predefined bit pattern.
   The Session-Reflector then checks for bit errors by comparing the
   received padding against the predefined bit pattern.  This allows for
   the detection of a single bit error or a burst of bit errors and the
   measurement of the residual BER.  The Session-Reflector does not
   discard the STAMP test packet with bit errors but instead reflects it
   back to the Session-Sender after correcting the bit errors.  The
   Session-Reflector also returns the bit error count to the Session-
   Sender.

   Residual BER is measured in both the forward and reverse directions
   between the Session-Sender and the Session-Reflector using the
   procedure and extensions defined in this document.  The Residual BER
   is calculated using the number of bit errors detected and the number
   of bits received in the extra padding.

   As specified in [RFC8972], the Session-Sender and Session-Reflector
   test packets are symmetric in size.  The Session-Sender and Session-
   Reflector MUST ensure that the resulting test packets do not exceed
   the path MTU after adding the STAMP TLVs.

3.1.  Bit Errors in Non-measurement Fields of STAMP

   Note that the procedure and extensions defined in this document do
   not use the base STAMP packets, packet headers, or STAMP TLVs other
   than the "Extra Padding" TLV for residual BER measurement.  It is
   possible that the bit errors impact those non-measurement fields of
   the STAMP test packets causing verification failures.  Such STAMP
   test packets are reported using a different measurement metric.  The
   integrity of those fields can be verified using the HMAC mechanisms
   defined in [RFC8762] and [RFC8972].

4.  STAMP Procedure

   This document defines two TLV options for STAMP: "Bit Pattern in
   Padding" TLV (Type=TBA1) and "Bit Error Count in Padding" TLV
   (Type=TBA2).

   An example of a STAMP test packet used for measuring residual BER is
   shown in Figure 2.  It uses the "Extra Padding" TLV, the optional
   "Bit Pattern in Padding" TLV, and the "Bit Error Count in Padding"
   TLV.

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 5]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            STAMP Packet RFC 8972                              |
   .                                                               .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |STAMP TLV Flags|     Type=1    |           Length              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   ~                     Extra Padding                             ~
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |STAMP TLV Flags|     Type=TBA1 |           Length              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   ~            Optional Bit Pattern in Padding                    ~
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |STAMP TLV Flags|     Type=TBA2 |           Length=4            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                     Bit Error Count in Padding                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

           Figure 2: Example STAMP Packet to Measure Residual BER

4.1.  STAMP Session-Sender

   When a STAMP Session-Sender is set up to measure BER, it adds an
   "Extra Padding" (Type=1) TLV, a "Bit Error Count in Padding"
   (Type=TBA2) TLV, and optionally, a "Bit Pattern in Padding"
   (Type=TBA1) TLV in Session-Sender test packets.  The Session-Sender
   test packets carry only one "Bit Error Count in Padding" TLV, only
   one "Extra Padding" TLV [RFC8972] and optionally carry only one "Bit
   Pattern in Padding" TLV.

   The Session-Sender MUST add an "Extra Padding" TLV [RFC8972] when it
   adds a "Bit Pattern in Padding" TLV to the Session-Sender test
   packets.  The variable-length data in the "Bit Pattern in Padding"
   TLV MUST contain the bit pattern employed in the "Extra Padding" TLV.
   It is RECOMMENDED to have the length of the extra padding as an
   integer multiple of the length of the Bit Pattern to ease
   implementation.

   The Session-Sender MUST also add an "Extra Padding" TLV [RFC8972]
   when it adds a "Bit Error Count in Padding" TLV in the Session-Sender
   test packets.  The bit error count in padding MUST be set to 0.

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 6]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

   Note that the integrity of the "Bit Pattern in Padding" and "Bit
   Error Count in Padding" TLVs can be protected using the HMAC
   mechanisms defined in [RFC8972].

4.1.1.  Considerations for Bit Pattern

   It is possible that the bit pattern in the "Bit Pattern in Padding"
   TLV itself has bit errors.  This can result in a measurement error
   due to mismatch between the bit pattern and the extra padding.  One
   way to avoid this issue is for the Session-Sender and Session-
   Reflector to use the local configuration with the default value of
   "0xFF00" as the bit pattern, which is repeated in the extra padding.
   In this case, the "Bit Pattern in Padding" TLV is not transmitted in
   the STAMP test packets.

4.2.  STAMP Session-Reflector

   When the Session-Reflector receives a STAMP test packet with a "Bit
   Pattern in Padding" TLV, the Session-Reflector that supports this TLV
   MUST check the extra padding in the "Extra Padding" TLV against the
   bit pattern to detect any bits that do not match the bit pattern and
   count them as bit errors.

   When the Session-Reflector receives a STAMP test packet with a "Bit
   Error Count in Padding" TLV, the Session-Reflector that supports this
   TLV MUST check the "Extra Padding" TLV against the expected bit
   pattern to detect if there are any bits not matching the bit pattern
   and count them as bit errors.  The Session-Reflector updates the
   count of bit errors in the received "Bit Error Count in Padding" TLV
   and reflects the TLV back to the Session-Sender.  If no bit errors
   are detected, the bit error count remains as 0 in the reflected "Bit
   Error Count in Padding" TLV.

   The Session-Reflector corrects the bit errors in the "Extra Padding"
   TLV by matching the bit pattern and reflects the corrected "Extra
   Padding" TLV to the Session-Sender.  The corrected "Extra Padding"
   TLV is used to measure the residual BER in the reverse direction.

4.2.1.  STAMP TLV Conformant Check

   If the Session-Reflector receives a STAMP test packet with a "Bit
   Pattern in Padding" TLV or a "Bit Error Count in Padding" TLV without
   an "Extra Padding" TLV or with more than one "Extra Padding" TLV, it
   MUST set the C flag (Conformant) defined in
   [I-D.ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts] to 1 in the STAMP TLV Flags in the
   reflected STAMP test packet for those STAMP TLVs.

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 7]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

   If the Session-Reflector receives a STAMP test packet that contains
   more than one "Bit Pattern in Padding" TLV or more than one "Bit
   Error Count in Padding" TLV, it MUST set the C flag (Conformant)
   defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts] to 1 in the STAMP TLV
   Flags in the reflected STAMP test packet for those STAMP TLVs.

4.3.  Considerations for Link Aggregation Group

   Networks may experience transmission bit errors differently for
   different link members of a Link Aggregation Group (LAG).  The
   procedure and extensions defined in this document are equally
   applicable to measuring residual BER in both directions for each
   individual member of the LAG.

   For delay measurement of LAG member links, a separate STAMP micro-
   session is created for each member of the LAG.  The STAMP extension
   for the Micro-Session ID TLV, as defined in [RFC9534], is used to
   identify each member link of the LAG associated with the STAMP micro-
   session on the Session-Sender and Session-Reflector.  The Session-
   Reflector replies on the same member of the LAG in the reverse
   direction based on the information in the received Session-Sender
   test packet and on either the local configuration for the micro-
   session or the information from the data plane where the test packet
   was received.

   Note that in order to get a good approximation of the BER, it is
   RECOMMENDED to transmit the STAMP test packets with padding that
   match the link MTU size.

5.  STAMP Extensions

5.1.  Bit Pattern in Padding STAMP TLV

   The "Bit Pattern in Padding" TLV is optional and is carried by
   Session-Sender and Session-Reflector test packets.  The format of the
   TLV is shown in Figure 3.

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |STAMP TLV Flags|  Type=TBA1    |         Length                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   ~                  Bit Pattern in Padding                       ~
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                 Figure 3: Bit Pattern in Padding STAMP TLV

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 8]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

   The TLV fields are defined as follows:

   STAMP TLV Flags: The STAMP TLV Flags follow the procedures described
   in [RFC8972].

   Type: Type (value TBA1)

   Length: A two-octet field equal to the length of the Data in octets.

   Bit Pattern in Padding: The repeated bit pattern used in extra
   padding.

5.2.  Bit Error Count in Padding STAMP TLV

   The "Bit Error Count in Padding" TLV is optional and is carried by
   Session-Sender and Session-Reflector test packets.  The format of the
   TLV is shown in Figure 4.

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |STAMP TLV Flags|  Type=TBA2    |         Length=4              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  Bit Error Count in Padding                   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

               Figure 4: Bit Error Count in Padding STAMP TLV

   The TLV fields are defined as follows:

   STAMP TLV Flags: The STAMP TLV Flags follow the procedures described
   in [RFC8972].

   Type: Type (value TBA2)

   Length: A two-octet field set to 4 for the Data.

   Bit Error Count in Padding: The count of bit errors in extra padding.

6.  Data Model Parameters

6.1.  Configuration Data Model Parameters

   The configuration data model for the residual BER measurement using
   STAMP MUST allow to set the following parameters:

      - Padding size (number of bytes)

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                  [Page 9]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

      - Padding bit pattern (with variable length of bytes)

      - Transmit interval for STAMP test packets

      - Computation interval as a multiple of transmit interval for
      reporting the BER

6.2.  Operational Data Model Parameters

   The operational data model for the residual BER measurement using
   STAMP MUST allow to telemetry the following parameters:

   Forward direction (near-end) residual BER measurement:

      - Number of total packets received in the computation interval

      - Number of total packets received with non-zero Bit Error Count
      in TLV in the computation interval

      - Number of total bits in the padding TLV of all received packets
      in the computation interval

      - Number of total Bit Error Count in TLV of all received packets
      in the computation interval

   Reverse direction (far-end) residual BER measurement:

      - Number of total packets received in the computation interval

      - Number of total packets received with bit errors in the
      computation interval

      - Number of total bits in the padding TLV of all received packets
      in the computation interval

      - Number of total bit errors in all received packets in the
      computation interval

   Thresholds are defined for the forward and reverse directions of the
   residual BER measurement, as number of bit errors per million and
   number of packets with bit errors per million, computed during the
   computation interval.  An alarm is generated, and an event-driven
   telemetry is triggered when the computed metric crosses the
   threshold.

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

7.  Security Considerations

   The security considerations specified in [RFC8762] and [RFC8972]
   apply to the procedure and extensions defined in this document.

8.  Implementation Status

   Editorial note: Please remove this section prior to publication.

   An open-source implementation of the Simple Two-Way Active
   Measurement Protocol (RFC 8762) is available in Teaparty.

   https://github.com/cerfcast/teaparty

   An implementation of the solution in this document is available at
   the following location:

   https://github.com/cerfcast/teaparty/
   commit/592558a38dbcf9b273acb2a2fe8ab0d8f16d0709

   And (as bonus) there is also support for the BER in the Wireshark
   dissector:

   https://github.com/cerfcast/teaparty/
   commit/608b9e89fce2f25ed88eaa367d0bacc693845da2

   Contact:

   William Hawkins

   University of Cincinnati

   Email: hawkinsw@obs.cr

9.  IANA Considerations

   IANA has created the "STAMP TLV Types" registry for [RFC8972].  IANA
   is requested to allocate a value for the "Bit Pattern in Padding" TLV
   Type and a value for the "Bit Error Count in Padding" TLV Type from
   the IETF Review TLV range of the same registry.

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

          +=======+============================+===============+
          | Value |        Description         | Reference     |
          +=======+============================+===============+
          | TBA1  |   Bit Pattern in Padding   | This document |
          +-------+----------------------------+---------------+
          | TBA2  | Bit Error Count in Padding | This document |
          +-------+----------------------------+---------------+

                         Table 1: STAMP TLV Types

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8762]  Mirsky, G., Jun, G., Nydell, H., and R. Foote, "Simple
              Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol", RFC 8762,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8762, March 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8762>.

   [RFC8972]  Mirsky, G., Min, X., Nydell, H., Foote, R., Masputra, A.,
              and E. Ruffini, "Simple Two-Way Active Measurement
              Protocol Optional Extensions", RFC 8972,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8972, January 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8972>.

   [I-D.ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts]
              Mirsky, G., Ruffini, E., Nydell, H., Foote, R. F., and W.
              Hawkins, "Performance Measurement with Asymmetrical
              Traffic Using STAMP", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts-08, 28 June 2025,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-
              asymmetrical-pkts-08>.

10.2.  Informative References

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft      STAMP for Residual Bit Error Rate      November 2025

   [RFC9534]  Li, Z., Zhou, T., Guo, J., Mirsky, G., and R. Gandhi,
              "Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol Extensions for
              Performance Measurement on a Link Aggregation Group",
              RFC 9534, DOI 10.17487/RFC9534, January 2024,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9534>.

Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to thank Ianik Semco and Miloslav Kopka for
   the discussions on the bit error rate measurements.  The authors
   would also like to thank Ruediger Geib for reviewing this document
   and providing many useful comments and suggestions.  Thank you,
   Zhenqiang Li, Li Zhang, and Xiao Min, for your review comments and
   suggestions.  The authors would also like to thank William Hawkins
   for implementing the solution defined in this document and providing
   many useful suggestions.

Authors' Addresses

   Rakesh Gandhi (editor)
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   Canada
   Email: rgandhi@cisco.com

   Peter Schoenmaker
   Meta Platforms, Inc.
   United Kingdom
   Email: psch@meta.com

   Richard Foote
   Nokia
   Email: footer.foote@nokia.com

Gandhi, et al.             Expires 18 May 2026                 [Page 13]