Minutes IETF102: ippm
minutes-102-ippm-00

IETF-102 ippm agenda
Session 2018-07-18 1330-1500: Saint-Paul/Sainte-Cath

IPPM Agenda IETF 102
When: 13:30 - 15:00 EDT, Wednesday 18 July 2018
Where: Saint-Paul/Saint-Catherine, Fairmont The Queen Elizabeth, Montreal
Chairs: Brian Trammell, Bill Cerveny, Tommy Pauly
Welcome, Note Well, Agenda,
Status Chairs

2 documents in the RFC editor queue
WGLC on twamp-test

---------------------------------------------------------------
draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry A. Morton
draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry A. Morton

Al presenting
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ippm-1-2-initial-performance-metric-registry-entries-draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-and-draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry-00
Al - Summary (Slide 3 - 6) of metric and initial registry, no revisions to
metric-registry Al - Brian Trammel has promised to provide comments on TCP
metric Discussion points (Slide 7) Brian T> Random source port wont fit in, 
Use DNS ID (16 bits) - How about support for stress test with 16bits on DNS
server Nalini > DNS is getting encrypted. Al > The measurements are at active
so has access to DNS ID Al > UDP periodic one-way delay and loss, preference?
[no opinions]

Next steps (Slide 8)
Rachel > XRBLOCK not sure of interest/how it will progress
Tommy > Requests the wg for feedback

---------------------------------------------------------------

draft-ietf-ippm-route A. Morton
Al presenting
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ippm-3-advanced-unidirectional-route-assessment-aura-draft-amf-ippm-route-00
Slide 3 > Routing class C does not refer to address class C. Slide 4 > Passive
observation of a stream at transit/mid-point Brian T>Volunteers Jari for
mid-point RTT/traceroute like tools to look at this document Brian T(chain hat
on)> Intended status - standards track Al > Interested in determining what
other measuremnts can be done at the mid-point vantage point Al > Looking for
review for Section 4 and beyond Alia volunteered to review the draft

---------------------------------------------------------------

draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data F. Brockners
draft-brockners-ippm-ioam-vxlan-gpe
draft-brockners-ippm-ioam-geneve
draft-weis-ippm-ioam-gre
draft-ioametal-ippm-6man-ioam-ipv6-options
draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport

Frank B presenting
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ippm-4-to-8-in-situ-oam-ioam-numerous-ioam-drafts-00
Summary of changes 02 -> 03 : Layering, Security consideration Open issue > No
namespace for the trace data collected to qualify the data such as app-data,
node, interface IDs, Proposal > To include namespace ID and carry namespace
specific flags/data, to resolve limitation of IOAM data field definitions.
Encap drafts > reuse of formats from IOAM data draft - VXLAN-GPE, GRE, GENEVE,
IPv6 GRE can be used to carry IOAM in IPv4. IPv6 encapsulation new draft -
defines HbH and DO IPv6 options to carry IOAM data

Mickey Speigel  presenting  Raw Export of IOAM Data using IPFIX
Brian T (not as chair)> As a mainatiner of IPFIX namespace registry - The
current proposal reusing the sections for IOAM raw export will break
Collectors. Consider defining new elements for IOAM packet type. Create new
ones review https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7013 The ipheaderpacketsection,
datalinkframesection were defined and optimized for PSAMP Nalini > 1.
Functionally this is cool. 2. Enterprise deployments capture entire packets.
why not do that? Mickey > Helps in filtering, optimizing data Brian T relaying
yakob stein > Privacy/security wire tapping issues, similar to during PSAMP
standardization Frank & Mickey > Next steps Brian T > Any objections to WGLC
for data draft Briant T > Update the draft with the namespace and then ask for
WGLC Alia Atlas > Packet format for GRE and Geneve need to review. On the
namespace - likes the idea, lets you do additional administrative policies
Mickey > Encap drafts - IPPM wg adoption? Mirjam > Encap drafts not in charter?
Brian T > Idea is to start the encap & review in IPPM and then take it to
respective wgs. Has it been discussed in encap WGs? Frank > Geneve (NVO3)
discussed, NSH yes, GRE no, 6man no. Tommy > Create awareness about the encap
in the respective WGs before adopting it here. Alia Atlas > Good to get it
review in RTGWG. VXLAN GPE is interesting, no RFC for it yet, will be
informational eventually. You need an ethernet protocol code point.

Mirjam > Havent reviewed the encap drafts. Prefers the encap drafts to progress
in the respective WG rather than in IPPM. NEed AD, chair discussion. For 6man
the work can progress in IPPM per process in 6man, other encaps should be
discussed with the respective wgs.

---------------------------------------------------------------

draft-fioccola-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark  G. Fioccola
Fioccola presenting
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ippm-11-multipoint-alternate-marking-method-for-passive-and-hybrid-performance-monitoring-draft-fioccola-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark-01
Document changes, Summary Next steps WG adoption? Brian T> wont ask for WG
adoption now, will consider after the queue of active drafts is drained
sometime b/n IETF 102-103. After another WGLC

---------------------------------------------------------------
draft-fear-ippm-mpdm  N. Elkins
Nalini presenting
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ippm-10-m-pdm-draft-fear-ippm-mpdm-00
Combines marking method and PDM - as PDM is end to end, need path data
Advantages of marking - batching, aggregating averages e.g. delay M-PDM as Hbh
options Open to ideas/opinions on Middle box identifier

Brian T (no hat) > Scope? single administrative domain?
Nalini > PDM is Internet wide, this could be single administrative domain,
undecided Brian T > Middle box identifier needs to be bigger if it is across
domaina, integrity protection Brian T > Why PSN at each middlebox hop? Nalini >
PSN is useful to find drops Frank B > Timestamp formats? Nalini > Like to find
the interest in this work before fully fleshing it out. Open to collaborate
with the IOAM folks

---------------------------------------------------------------

Ligntning Talks (as time permits)
draft-alavarez-hamelin-tictoc-sic-01 (J. Ignacio Alvarez-Hamelin)
Ignacio presenting
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ippm-11-synchronizing-internet-clock-frequency-protocol-sic-draft-alavarez-hamelin-tictoc-sic-00

draft-zhou-ippm-ioam-yang-01 (T. Zhou)
Tianran presenting
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ippm-13-a-yang-data-model-for-in-situ-oam-draft-zhou-ippm-ioam-yang-01
Request for review and adoption -
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhou-ippm-ioam-yang/ Brian T> would you
like to trying an experiment to progress the model in github as the focus of 
work, treating the generation of drafts/RFCs as secondary (this is somewhat
described in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-claise-semver-02#section-3).
Authors open to the process

*********** Couldnt get to the following lightning talks *****************

draft-song-ippm-ioam-tunnel-mode-00 (T. Zhou)
draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm (R. Gandhi)