9:00 10m Welcome, Note Well, Agenda, Status Chairs Last Call for draft-ietf-ippm-stamp & Update on draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-yang Last call done! Tal to shepherd draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-yang 9:10 5m draft-ietf-ippm-route A. Morton Presentation: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-ippm-advanced-unidirectional-route-assessment-aura-draft-amf-ippm-route-00 Reviewers who volunteered - Frank Brockners, Footer 9:15 25m Metrics Registry Discussion A. Morton draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry & draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry Presentation: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-ippm-initial-performance-metric-registry-entries-draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-00 Mirja Kühlewind : Why RFC number in the Name of the metric? Metric unchanged in a new updated RFC what would happen? Al: Will revisit and clarify on mailer Tommy: New metrics are confined to RFCs, any change to metrics in a new RFC will fate share with the metric definition Al: slide 10 : question to the wg: are all the 3 name, id, URI needed? Possibly not. Brian T: (as an Individual) 16 bit integers why not unbounded int type? Al: It was inherited from LMAP. Brian T/Al: 32 bit integer would work. Al: Opinions on getting rid of URN? Brian T: Yes for getting rid of URN as a shepherd. Chairs: last call on metric registry....done! 9:40 40m IOAM Discussion F. Brockners draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data Presenation:https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-ippm-ioam-related-02 Comments on editorial updates and active flag: Greg M– regarding the editorials, the draft specify out of scope context, shouldn’t specify protocol behavior. Will be discussed in side meetings Greg M– repeated for the active flag Brian T – active – need to make sure that we treat it well, since this is an active measurement which may raise some concerns Mirja Kühlewind – need to consider also congestion for active measurement. Suggest to add another document to discuss and specify the behavior of it Igor Lubashev – the active intoduce amplification attacks and other security issues since duplication may arrise. Barak – this is only for drop/decapsulate not to generate packets. Comments on Immediate export flag: Haoyu Song: This is similar to PBT draft. A bit is not sufficient. Correlation at the collector is harder, E2E sequence number is not sufficient. Barak: Defer to side meetings (6:30 pm side meetings) Frank: Should export at some of the nodes but not all the nodes be considered? e.g. when a node notices that there is space running out, export when it is found to be full? Brian T: Safety envelop for not letting this feature create a blast of exports. Encapsulation drafts, Export, Yang model, Tools and additional options (1 min per encap presentation) Discussion on class of drafts to be adopted in IPPM: Brian T: Decision to be made here is there a different home or the work need to be done in IPPM?: v6 has a precedency with PDM options worked at IPPM in collaboration 6man. Mirja Kühlewind: Merge the drafts options and deployment consideration draft Frank B: deployment consideration is expected to be generic across other HbH and dest options added. Mirja Kühlewind: As the AD: present it to 6man and not considered adoption in ippm la Brian T: Ether type - not sure of ippm being the right place, perhaps int area or AD sponsored . AI on Brian T to find what can be done with ether-type for encap. Mirja Kühlewind: Should have usecase and deployment scenarios and concentrate on a subset of encaps. Brian T: Ether type and v6 may be high impact Briant T: No to IPv4 options, IESG recommendation Brian T: spring ioam SRv6, has been presented in Spring, can it be a home? Rakesh Gandhi: Not presented in Spring wg yet. Greg M: MPLS, Spring better home for mpls, spring ioam work Greg M: On SRv6 - v6 should be done in 6man, adopt it in 6man. Brian T: Options 6man recommends getting it reviewed at 6man and work done in wg proposing the usecase for options. e.g. PDM options Greg M: Preferrs v6 expertise in 6man to progress v6 work Rake Mirja Kühlewind: v6 charter text - present it there, if they want to adopt do it. Dang Juanna: Brian T: discuss on list Gorry F: Avoid conflicts with 6man, Gorry F: Do not rule out usefullness of extension header, especially useful in constrained environments Conclusion on encap: Brian T: IOAM architecture: IOAM methods, data model and encaps and interaction b/n encaps : prioritize and plan for getting it through IETF - Ether type and v6 seem to be highest impact for encapsulating IOAM. Mirja Kühlewind: What are the hardware implementations moving forward with? Jai Kumar: as a hardware vendor, its a nightmare in implementing it in hardware. Barak : mellanox also a hardware vendor, interested in v4, v6, vxlan, Rajiv Asati: As a 6man active member prefers v6 options for IOAM to be done in IPPM as long as it doesnt change v6 protocol semantics Greg Mirsky: hardware early adopters need to deal with unstable drafts. Jai Kumar: Flags are in the data header that impact the forwarding behaviour, those should go in the protocol. Tommy: Summarize and notes of side discussion to the list. Ether type AI of Brian, v6 after presenting it at 6man - follow up on the list after that. Frank B: priority list of encap protocols in side meetings Tommy: On the flags - separate the flag discussion into separate drafts and then fold it into the data draft based on WG consensus. Frank B: what about other categories? Brian T: Opsawg for Export. If opsawg does not care come back to IPPM Chairs: Pick priorities for what needs to be done Jai Kumar: focus on data types. 10:20 20m Alternate Marking and Related Work 5m draft-ietf-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark G. Fioccola Presentation: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-ippm-draft-ietf-ippm-multipoint-alt-mark-01-00 5m draft-cfb-ippm-spinbit-new-measurements M. Cociglio Presentation: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-ippm-draft-cfb-ippm-spinbit-new-measurements-00-00 Brian T: Good work, there is discussion in QUIC on the usefulness of 2 bits for spin bit and the limited benefits it can provide over 1 spin bit. Is there interest to work on methologies like spin bit for other protocols? Will take it to the list. 5m draft-zhou-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking T. Zhou Presentation: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking-method-00 5m draft-mizrahi-ippm-compact-alternate-marking T. Mizrahi Presentation:https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-ippm-compact-alternate-marking-00 Additional drafts: 5m Greg M draft-mirksky-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-00 Presentation:https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-ippm-simple-two-way-active-measurement-protocol-stamp-extensions-draft-mirsky-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-00 Rakesh Gandhi: Direct loss TLV is missing. There is an alternate proposal as well. Greg M: Its there not published yet.