[Search] [pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03                                                   
Network Working Group                                              Z. Li
Internet-Draft                                              China Mobile
Intended status: Standards Track                                 M. Chen
Expires: May 6, 2021                                              Huawei
                                                               G. Mirsky
                                                               ZTE Corp.
                                                       November 02, 2020


                     Performance Measurement on LAG
                       draft-li-ippm-pm-on-lag-03

Abstract

   This document defines extensions to One-way Active Measurement
   Protocol (OWAMP), Two-way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP), and
   Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) to implement
   performance measurement on every member link of a Link Aggregation
   Group (LAG).  With the measured metrics of each member links of a
   LAG, it enables operators to enforce performance metric based traffic
   steering policy among the member links.

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
   [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals,
   as shown here.

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 May 6, 2021.





Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Micro Session on LAG  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Mirco OWAMP Session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Micro OWAMP-Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  Micro OWAMP-Test  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Mirco TWAMP Session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  Micro TWAMP-Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.2.  Micro TWAMP-Test  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       4.2.1.  Sender Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       4.2.2.  Reflector Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Mirco STAMP Session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     5.1.  Micro STAMP-Test  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       5.1.1.  Session-Sender Packet Format  . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       5.1.2.  Session-Reflector Packet Format . . . . . . . . . . .  13
       5.1.3.  Micro STAMP-Test Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     6.1.  Mico OWAMP-Control Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     6.2.  Mico TWAMP-Control Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19

1.  Problem Statement

   Link Aggregation Group (LAG), as defined in [IEEE802.1AX], provides
   mechanisms to combine multiple physical links into a single logical
   link.  This logical link provides higher bandwidth and better
   resiliency, because if one of the physical member links fails, the



Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


   aggregate logical link can continue to forward traffic over the
   remaining operational physical member links.

   Normally, when forwarding traffic over a LAG, a hash based or the
   like mechanism is used to load balance the traffic among member links
   of the LAG.  In some cases, the link delays of the member links are
   different because the member links are over different transport
   paths.  To provide low delay service to time sensitive traffic, we
   have to know the link delay of each member link of a LAG and then
   steer traffic accordingly.  This requires a solution that could
   measure the performance metrics of each member link of a LAG.

   However, when using One-way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP)
   [RFC4656], Two-way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) [RFC5357], or
   Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) [RFC8762] to
   measure the performance of a LAG, the LAG is treated as a single
   logical link/path.  The measured metrics reflect the performance of
   one member link or an average of some/all member links of the LAG.

   In addition, for LAG, using passive or hybrid methods (like
   alternative marking[RFC8321] or iOAM [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]) can
   only monitor the link crossed by traffic.  Means the measured metrics
   only reflect the performance of some member links or an average of
   some/all member links of the LAG as well.  Therefore, in order to
   measure every link of a LAG, using active methods would be more
   appropriate.

   This document defines extensions to OWAMP [RFC4656], TWAMP [RFC5357]
   or STAMP [RFC8762] to implement performance measurement on every
   member link of a LAG.

2.  Micro Session on LAG

   This document intends to address the scenario (e.g., Figure 1) where
   two hosts (A and B) are directly connected by a LAG (e.g., the LAG is
   consisted by three links).  The purpose is to measure the performance
   of each link of the LAG.

                     +---+                       +---+
                     |   |-----------------------|   |
                     | A |-----------------------| B |
                     |   |-----------------------|   |
                     +---+                       +---+

                           Figure 1: PM for LAG

   To measure performance metrics of every member link of a LAG,
   multiple sessions (one session for each member link) need to be



Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


   established between the two hosts that are connected by the LAG.
   These sessions are called micro sessions in the remainder of this
   document.

   All micro sessions of a LAG share the same Sender Address, Receiver
   Address.  As for the Sender Port and Receiver Port, the micro
   sessions may share the same Sender Port and Receiver Port pair, or
   each micro session is configured with different Sender Port and
   Receiver Port pair.  But from simplifying operation point of view,
   the former is recommended.

   In addition, with micro sessions, there needs a way to correlate a
   session with a member link.  For example, when receives a Control or
   Test packet, the Server/Reflector/Receiver needs to know from which
   member link the packet is received, and then correlate the packet
   with a micro session.  This is different from the existing OWAMP
   [RFC4656], TWAMP [RFC5357], or STAMP [RFC8762].

   This document defines new command types to indicate that a session is
   a micro session, the details are described in Section 3 and 4 of this
   document.  For a micro session, on receiving of a Control/Test
   packet, the receiver uses the receiving link to correlate the packet
   with a particular session.  In addition, Test packets may need to
   carry the member link information for validation checking.  For
   example, when a Session-Sender receives a Test packet, it may need to
   check whether the Test packet is from the expected member link.

3.  Mirco OWAMP Session

   This document assumes that the OWAMP Server and the OWAMP Receiver of
   an OWAMP micro session are at the same host.

3.1.  Micro OWAMP-Control

   To support micro OWAMP session, a new command, which is referred to
   as Request-OW-Micro-Session (TBD1), is defined in this document.  The
   Request-OW-Micro-Session command is based on the OWAMP Request-
   Session command, and uses the message format as described in
   Section 3.5 of OWAMP [RFC4656].  Test session creation of micro OWAMP
   session follows the same procedure as defined in Section 3.5 of OWAMP
   [RFC4656] with the following additions:

   When a OWAMP Server receives a Request-OW-Micro-Session command, if
   the Session is accepted, the OWAMP Server MUST build an association
   between the session and the member link from which the Request-
   Session message is received.





Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


3.2.  Micro OWAMP-Test

   Micro OWAMP-Test reuses the OWAMP-Test packet format and procedures
   as defined in Section 4 of OWAMP [RFC4656] with the following
   additions:

   The micro OWAMP Sender MUST send the micro OWAMP-Test packets over
   the member link with which the session is associated.  When receives
   a Test packet, the micro OWAMP receiver MUST use the member link from
   which the Test packet is received to correlate the micro OWAMP
   session.  If there is no such a session, the Test packet MUST be
   discarded.

4.  Mirco TWAMP Session

   As above, this document assumes that the TWAMP Server and the TWAMP
   Session-Reflector of a micro OWAMP session are at the same host.

4.1.  Micro TWAMP-Control

   To support micro TWAMP session, a new command, which is referred to
   as Request-TW-Micro-Session (TBD2), is defined in this document.  The
   Request-TW-Micro-Session command is based on the TWAMP Request-
   Session command, and uses the message format as described in
   Section 3.5 of TWAMP [RFC5357].  Test session creation of micro TWAMP
   session follows the same procedure as defined in Section 3.5 of TWAMP
   [RFC5357] with the following additions:

   When a micro TWAMP Server receives a Request-TW-Micro-Session
   command, if the micro TWAMP Session is accepted, the micro TWAMP
   Server MUST build an association between the session and the member
   link from which the Request-Session message is received.

4.2.  Micro TWAMP-Test

   The micro TWAMP-Test protocol is based on the TWAMP-Test protocol
   [RFC5357] with the following extensions.

4.2.1.  Sender Behavior

   In addition to inheriting the TWAMP sender behavior as defined
   Section 4.1 of [RFC5357], the micro TWAMP Session-Sender MUST send
   the micro TWAMP-Test packets over the member link with which the
   session is associated.

   When sending Test packet, the micro TWAMP Session-Sender MUST put the
   Sender member link identifier that is associated with the micro TWAMP
   session in the Sender Member Link ID.  If the Session-Sender knows



Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


   the Reflector member link identifier, it MUST put it in the Reflector
   Member Link ID fields (see Figure 2 and Figure 3).  Otherwise, the
   Reflector Member Link ID field MUST be set to zero.

   The Sender member link identifier is used by the Session-Sender to
   check whether a reflected Test packet is received from the member
   link that associates to the correct micro TWAMP session.  Therefore,
   it is carried in the Sender Member Link ID field of a Test packet and
   sent to the Session-Reflector.  Then it will be sent back by the
   Session-Reflector with the reflected Test packet.

   The Reflector member link identifier carried in the Reflector Member
   Link ID field is used by the Session-Receiver to check whether a Test
   packet is received from the member link that associates to the
   correct micro TWAMP session.  Means that the Session-Sender has to
   learns the Reflector member link identifier.  Once the Session-Sender
   learns the Reflector member link identifier, it MUST put the
   identifier in the Reflector Member Link ID field (see Figure 2 or
   Figure 3) of the Test packets that will be sent to the Session-
   Reflector.  The Reflector member link identifier can be obtained from
   pre-configuration or learned through control plane or data plane
   (e.g., learned from a reflected Test packet).  How to abtain/learn
   the Reflector member link identifier is out of the scope of this
   document.

   When receives a reflected Test packet, the micro TWAMP Session-Sender
   MUST use the receiving member link to correlate the reflected Test
   packet to a micro TWAMP session.  If there is no such a session, the
   reflected Test packet MUST be discarded.  If a matched session
   exists, the Session-Sender MUST use the identifier carried in the
   Sender Member Link ID field to validate whether the reflected Test
   packet is correctly transmitted over the expected member link.  If
   the validation is failed, the Test packet MUST be discarded.

4.2.1.1.  Packet Format and Content

   The micro TWAMP Session-Sender packet format is based on the TWAMP
   Session-Sender packet format as defined in Section 4.1.2 of
   [RFC5357].  In addition, in order to carry the LAG member link
   identifier, two new fields (Sender and Reflector Member Link ID) are
   added.  The formats are as below:

   For unauthenticated mode:








Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 6]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


        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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        Sequence Number                        |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                          Timestamp                            |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |        Error Estimate         |             MBZ               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |    Sender Member Link ID      |   Reflector Member Link ID    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       .                         Packet Padding                        .
       .                                                               .
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 2: Session-Sender Packet format in Unauthenticated Mode

   For authenticated mode:






























Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 7]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


        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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        Sequence Number                        |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       |                        MBZ (12 octets)                        |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                          Timestamp                            |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |        Error Estimate         |              MBZ              |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |    Sender Member Link ID      |   Reflector Member Link ID    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       |                       HMAC (16 octets)                        |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       .                        Packet Padding                         .
       .                                                               .
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

       Figure 3: Session-Sender Packet Format in Authenticated Mode

   Except for the Sender/Reflector Member Link ID field, all the other
   fields are the same as defined in Section 4.1.2 of TWAMP [RFC5357],
   which is originally defined in Section 4.1.2 of OWAMP [RFC4656].
   Therefore, it follows the same procedure and guidelines as defined in
   Section 4.1.2 of TWAMP [RFC5357].

   Sender Member Link ID (2-octets in length): it is defined to carry
   the LAG member link identifier of the Sender side.  The value of the
   Sender Member Link ID MUST be unique at the Session-Sender.

   Reflector Member Link ID (2-octets in length): it is defined to carry
   the LAG member link identifier of the Reflector side.  The value of
   the Reflector Member ID MUST be unique at the Session-Reflector.

4.2.2.  Reflector Behavior

   The micro TWAMP Session-Reflector inherits the behaviors of a TWAMP
   Session-Reflector as defined in Section 4.2 of [RFC5357].




Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 8]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


   In addition, when receives a Test packet, the micro TWAMP Session-
   Reflector MUST use the receiving member link to correlate the Test
   packet to a micro TWAMP session.  If there is no such a session, the
   Test packet MUST be discarded.  If Reflector Member Link ID is not
   zero, the Reflector MUST use the Reflector member link identifier to
   check whether it associates with the receiving member link.  If it
   does not, the Test packet MUST be discarded.

   When sends a response to the received Test packet, the micro TWAMP
   Session-Sender MUST copy the Sender member link identifier from the
   received Test packet and put it in the Sender Member Link ID field of
   the reflected Test packet (see Figure 4 and Figure 5).  In addition,
   the micro TWAMP Session-Reflector MUST fill the Reflector Member Link
   ID field (see Figure 2 or Figure 3) of the reflected Test packet with
   the member link identifier that are associated with the micro TWAMP
   session.

4.2.2.1.  Packet Format and Content

   The micro TWAMP Session-Reflector packet format is based on the TWAMP
   Session-Reflector packet format as defined in Section 4.2.1 of
   [RFC5357].  In addition, in order to carry the LAG member link
   identifier, two new fields (Sender and Reflector Member Link ID) are
   added.  The formats are as below:

   For unauthenticated mode:

























Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                  [Page 9]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        Sequence Number                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                          Timestamp                            |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |         Error Estimate        |               MBZ             |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Receive Timestamp                       |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                      Sender Sequence Number                   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Sender Timestamp                        |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |      Sender Error Estimate    |    Sender Member Link ID      |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Sender TTL   |      MBZ      |   Reflector Member Link ID    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      .                                                               .
      .                         Packet Padding                        .
      .                                                               .
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Figure 4: Session-Reflector Packet Format in Unauthenticated Mode

   For authenticated and encrypted modes:

      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        Sequence Number                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        MBZ (12 octets)                        |
      |                                                               |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                          Timestamp                            |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |         Error Estimate        |               MBZ             |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Sender Member Link ID      |   Reflector Member Link ID    |



Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 10]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        Receive Timestamp                      |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        MBZ (8 octets)                         |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        Sender Sequence Number                 |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        MBZ (12 octets)                        |
      |                                                               |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                      Sender Timestamp                         |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |      Sender Error Estimate    |                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               +
      |                        MBZ (6 octets)                         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Sender TTL   |                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                               +
      |                                                               |
      |                                                               |
      |                        MBZ (15 octets)                        |
      +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      |                        HMAC (16 octets)                       |
      |                                                               |
      |                                                               |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      .                         Packet Padding                        .
      .                                                               .
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 5: Session-Reflector Packet Format in Authenticated Mode

   Except for the Sender/Reflector Member Link ID field, all the other
   fields are the same as defined in Section 4.2.1 of TWAMP [RFC5357].
   Therefore, it follows the same procedure and guidelines as defined in
   Section 4.2.1 of TWAMP [RFC5357].

   Sender Member Link ID (2-octets in length): it is defined to carry
   the LAG member link identifier of the Sender side.  The value of the
   Sender Member Link ID MUST be unique at the Session-Sender.




Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 11]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


   Reflector Member Link ID (2-octets in length): it is defined to carry
   the LAG member link identifier of the Reflector side.  The value of
   the Reflector Member ID MUST be unique at the Session-Reflector.

5.  Mirco STAMP Session

5.1.  Micro STAMP-Test

   The micro STAMP-Test protocol is based on the STAMP-Test protocol
   [RFC8762] and [I-D.ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv] with the following
   extensions.

5.1.1.  Session-Sender Packet Format

   The micro STAMP Session-Sender Test packet formats are based on the
   STAMP Session-Sender Test packet formats and with some extensions,
   two new fields (Sender and Reflector Member Link ID) are added.  The
   formats are as follows:

        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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        Sequence Number                        |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                          Timestamp                            |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |         Error Estimate        |            SSID               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |    Sender Member Link ID      |   Reflector Member Link ID    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       |                        MBZ  (24 octets)                       |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

       Figure 6: Session-Sender Test Packet in Unauthenticated Mode











Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 12]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


        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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                      Sequence Number                          |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       |                      MBZ (12 octets)                          |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        Timestamp                              |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |        Error Estimate         |                SSID           |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |    Sender Member Link ID      |   Reflector Member Link ID    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                         MBZ (64 octets)                       |
       ~                                                               ~
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       |                       HMAC (16 octets)                        |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

        Figure 7: Session-Sender Test Packet in Authenticated Mode

   Except for the Sender/Reflector Member Link ID fields, all the other
   fields are as defined in STAMP [RFC8762] and
   [I-D.ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv].

   Sender Member Link ID (2-octets in length): it is defined to carry
   the LAG member link identifier of the Sender side.  The value of the
   Sender Member Link ID MUST be unique at the Session-Sender.

   Reflector Member Link ID (2-octets in length): it is defined to carry
   the LAG member link identifier of the Reflector side.  The value of
   the Reflector Member ID MUST be unique at the Session-Reflector.

5.1.2.  Session-Reflector Packet Format

   The micro STAMP Session-Reflector Test packet formats are based on
   the STAMP Session-Reflector Test packet formats with some minor
   extensions, two new fields (Sender and Reflector Member Link ID) are
   added.  The formats are as follows:





Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 13]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


        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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        Sequence Number                        |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                          Timestamp                            |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |         Error Estimate        |              SSID             |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                          Receive Timestamp                    |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                 Session-Sender Sequence Number                |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                  Session-Sender Timestamp                     |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       | Session-Sender Error Estimate |    Sender Member Link ID      |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |Ses-Sender TTL |     MBZ       |   Reflector Member Link ID    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 8: Session-Reflector Test Packet in Unauthenticated Mode



























Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 14]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


       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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        Sequence Number                        |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        MBZ (12 octets)                        |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                          Timestamp                            |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |         Error Estimate        |            SSID               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |      Sender Member Link ID    |   Reflector Member Link ID    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        Receive Timestamp                      |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        MBZ (8 octets)                         |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                 Session-Sender Sequence Number                |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        MBZ (12 octets)                        |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                 Session-Sender Timestamp                      |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       | Session-Sender Error Estimate |                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               +
       |                          MBZ (6 octets)                       |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |Ses-Sender TTL |                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                               +
       |                                                               |
       |                        MBZ (15 octets)                        |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                        HMAC (16 octets)                       |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

       Figure 9: Session-Reflector Test Packet in Authenticated Mode



Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 15]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


   Except for the Sender/Reflector Member Link ID fields, all the other
   fields are as defined in STAMP [RFC8762] and
   [I-D.ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv].

   Sender Member Link ID (2-octets in length): it is defined to carry
   the LAG member link identifier of the Sender side.  The value of the
   Sender Member Link ID MUST be unique at the Session-Sender.

   Reflector Member Link ID (2-octets in length): it is defined to carry
   the LAG member link identifier of the Reflector side.  The value of
   the Reflector Member ID MUST be unique at the Session-Reflector.

5.1.3.  Micro STAMP-Test Procedures

   The micro STAMP-Test reuses the procedures as defined in Section 4 of
   STAMP [RFC8762] with the following additions:

   The micro STAMP Session-Sender MUST send the micro STAMP-Test packets
   over the member link with which the session is associated.

   The configuration and management of the mapping between a micro STAMP
   session and the Sender/Reflector member link identifiers are outside
   the scope of this document.

   When sending a Test packet, the micro STAMP Session-Sender MUST set
   the Sender Member Link ID field with the member link identifier that
   is associated with the micro STAMP session.  If the Session-Sender
   knows the Reflector member link identifier, it MUST put it in the
   Reflector Member Link ID field (see Figure 6 or Figure 7).
   Otherwise, the Reflector Member Link ID field MUST be set to zero.

   The Sender member link identifier is used by the Session-Sender to
   check whether a reflected Test packet is received from the member
   link that associates with the correct micro STAMP session.  The
   Reflector member link identifier is used by the Session-Receiver to
   check whether a Test packet is received from the member link that
   associates with the correct micro STAMP session.

   The Reflector member link identifier can be obtained from pre-
   configuration or learned through data plane (e.g., learned from a
   reflected Test packet).  How to abtain/learn the Reflector member
   link identifier is out of the scope of this document.

   When receives a Test packet, the micro STAMP Session-Reflector MUST
   use the receiving member link to correlate the Test packet to a micro
   STAMP session.  If there is no such a micro STAMP session, the Test
   packet MUST be discarded.  If the Reflector Member Link ID is not
   zero, the micro STAMP Session-Reflector MUST use the Reflector member



Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 16]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


   link identifier to check whether it associates with the micro STAMP
   session.  If it does not, the Test packet MUST be discarded and no
   reflected Test packet will be sent back the Session-Sender.  If all
   validation passed, the Session-Reflector sends a reflected Test
   packet to the Session-Sender.  The micro STAMP Session-Reflector MUST
   put the Sender and Reflector member link identifiers that are
   associated with the micro STAMP session in the Sender Member Link ID
   and Reflector Member Link ID fields (see Figure 8 and Figure 9)
   respectively.  The Sender member link identifier is copied from the
   received Test packet.

   When receives a reflected Test packet, the micro STAMP Session-Sender
   MUST use the receiving member link to correlate the reflected Test
   Packet to a micro STAMP session.  If there is no such a session, the
   reflected Test packet MUST be discarded.  If a matched micro STAMP
   session exists, the Session-Sender MUST use the identifier carried in
   the Sender Member Link ID field to check whether it associates with
   the session.  If the checking failed, the Test packet MUST be
   discarded.

6.  IANA Considerations

6.1.  Mico OWAMP-Control Command

   This document requires the IANA to allocate the following command
   type from OWAMP-Control Command Number Registry.

   Value  Description                   Semantics Definition
   TBD1   Request-OW-Micro-Session      This document, Section 3.1

6.2.  Mico TWAMP-Control Command

   This document requires the IANA to allocate the following command
   type from TWAMP-Control Command Number Registry.

   Value  Description                   Semantics Definition
   TBD1   Request-TW-Micro-Session      This document, Section 4.1

7.  Security Considerations

   The security considerations in [RFC4656], [RFC5357], [RFC8762] apply
   to this document.

8.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank Min Xiao, Fang Xin for the valuable
   comments to this work.




Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 17]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv]
              Mirsky, G., Min, X., Nydell, H., Foote, R., Masputra, A.,
              and E. Ruffini, "Simple Two-way Active Measurement
              Protocol Optional Extensions", draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-
              option-tlv-09 (work in progress), August 2020.

   [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>.

   [RFC4656]  Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M.
              Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol
              (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4656>.

   [RFC5357]  Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J.
              Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
              RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5357>.

   [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>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]
              Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., and T. Mizrahi, "Data Fields
              for In-situ OAM", draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-10 (work in
              progress), July 2020.

   [IEEE802.1AX]
              IEEE Std. 802.1AX, "IEEE Standard for Local and
              metropolitan area networks - Link Aggregation", November
              2008.






Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 18]


Internet-Draft                  PM on LAG                  November 2020


   [RFC8321]  Fioccola, G., Ed., Capello, A., Cociglio, M., Castaldelli,
              L., Chen, M., Zheng, L., Mirsky, G., and T. Mizrahi,
              "Alternate-Marking Method for Passive and Hybrid
              Performance Monitoring", RFC 8321, DOI 10.17487/RFC8321,
              January 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8321>.

Authors' Addresses

   Zhenqiang Li
   China Mobile

   Email: li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com


   Mach(Guoyi) Chen
   Huawei

   Email: mach.chen@huawei.com


   Greg Mirsky
   ZTE Corp.

   Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com



























Li, et al.                 Expires May 6, 2021                 [Page 19]