On 11/09/2025 07:43, [email protected] wrote:
Dear Gorry,
On behalf of the authors. We received feedback from Deb, Gunter, Med and Greg
and decided to publish revision -21.
https://author-tools.ietf.org/diff?doc_1=draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-21
We are looking forward to your feedback wherever the changes addressing your
concerns.
Best wishes
Thomas
Thanks for contacting me Thomas, my comments about this draft were very
general and I see improvements in the directions that I had hoped.
Please do publish the new revision.
Best wishes,
Gorry
-----Original Message-----
From: Graf Thomas, SCS-INI-NET-VNC-E2E
Sent: Friday, September 5, 2025 7:17 AM
To: Gorry Fairhurst <[email protected]>; The IESG <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: RE: [OPSAWG]Gorry Fairhurst's No Objection on
draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-20: (with COMMENT)
Dear Gorry,
On behalf of the authors, thank you very much for your detailed review and
comments.
We addressed your feedback together with Tim's, Mike's, Med's, Deb's, Éric's,
Greg's and Gunter's as following
https://author-tools.ietf.org/diff?doc_1=draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-20&url_2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/network-analytics/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry/refs/heads/main/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-21.txt
Here additional clarifications on Gunter's feedback:
GV> (see DISCUSS) There seems to be a miscommunication i here. The
alt-mark-framework is not measuring by inserting timestamps, but my setting
bits and alternating these bits to measure a delay based upon the event when a
a bit goes up or down.
Completely agree. The initial authors thoughts where that Enhanced Alternate
Marking is a subset auf Alternate Marking and therefore mentioning the term
Alternate Marking in the introduction and detail int section 7.5, In-Packet OAM
Application, would give clarity, however we understood from various feedback
that this was ambiguous. Therefore we removed Alternate Marking references and
focus on Enhanced Alternate Marking instead throughout the document. Enhanced
Alternate Marking does include a timestamp in the packet.
GV> ## (DISCUSS#4) In the below snip, on line 180 it is unclear what is a
"mean"?
This is described in section 4.4.2.1,
OWDelay_HybridType1_Passive_IP_RFC[RFC-to-be]_Seconds_Mean
I hope this addresses your comments. Looking forward to your review.
Best wishes
Thomas
-----Original Message-----
From: Gorry Fairhurst via Datatracker <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 4, 2025 6:09 PM
To: The IESG <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: [OPSAWG]Gorry Fairhurst's No Objection on
draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-20: (with COMMENT)
Gorry Fairhurst has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-20: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email
addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory
paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks to Martin Duke for his TSV-ART review, where he notes:
This document could use an editorial review for clarity. Sentence fragments like
"The timestamp when the packet is being received at OAM encapsulating node."
are hard to parse. The Introduction was really unclear and I had to read it a few times
to understand what this document was doing, despite a basic conceptual familiarity with
IOAM.
Please also see the DISCUSS comments of Gunter Van de Velde regarding operation
of Alt Mark.
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
