Dear Carlos,
thank you for asking your question. I believe that the definition of
In-Data-Packet OAM in the draft:
In-Data-Packet OAM:
The OAM information is carried in the packets that also carry the
data traffic. This is a specific case of Hybrid OAM. It was
sometimes referred to as "in-band".
Is not accurate in part that what is being being positioned as a special
case of Hybrid OAM is what defined in RFC 7799 as Hybrid OAM:
o Augmentation or modification of the stream of interest, or
employment of methods that modify the treatment of the stream =>
Hybrid Type I
The OAM information augments data packet whether it is IOAM as defined in
RFC 9197 or RFC 9326, or the Alternate Marking Method (RFC 9341). So
there's nothing "special case" in In-Data-Packet OAM definition, as it is
already described in RFC 7799 and is broadly adopted in IETF. Re-defining
it in draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization would, in my opinion, create
unnecessary confusion. What can the WG do to avoid such confusion? That is
for the WG, WG Chairs, and the Responsible AD to decide. Personally, I
subscribe to the idea that the document is ready when there's nothing left
to be removed without decreasing the value of the document.
Regards,
Greg
On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 9:09 PM Carlos Pignataro <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Greg,
>
>
>
>> - IOAM can be applied to synthetic test packets. While the IOAM is
>> “in-packet”, the packets that it is in are not data packets, so the
>> methodology is purely Active OAM : it uses dedicated OAM packets.
>>
>> GIM>> Yes, and that is what, in my opinion, mixes the characterization
> of OAM protocols according to RFC 7799 with how an OAM protocol can be
> applied. The fact that IOAM or the Alternate Marking method is used in
> combination with a data or synthetic packet doesn't change the
> characterization of the protocol.
>
>
> It actually does.
> Characterization: *The act of describing the qualities, traits, or
> distinctive features.*
> Just trying to understand what the objective of your reply is.
>
>
> On Sep 3, 2025, at 3:18 PM, Greg Mirsky <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> - Alternate marking can be applied to data packets, making it Hybrid
>> OAM. But I don’t read draft-fioccola to be talking about this mode.
>>
>> GIM>> I support the adoption of the draft as it provides a solid
> foundation for continued work. I intend to work and contribute to it,
> including adding the Alternate Marking method.
>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Still trying to understand your goal.
> You might want to reply about adoption on the other thread about
> draft-fioccola-ippm-on-path...?
> Note, it might be more useful to adapt new drafts to this
> characterization, than to try to change the characterization for every new
> draft.
>
> Best,
>
> Carlos.
>
>
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
