Dear Authors/Chairs/ADs, Please see below for feedback from the designated expert.
Best regards, David Dong IANA Services Sr. Specialist On Fri Aug 01 20:52:10 2025, gregimir...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi David, > thank you for your kind consideration. Iread the latest version of the > draft and found that my concern about the naming new IEs ( see > comments > from 10, 2024 > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/kbNvNZgNfDThtg3ZZj9q0Jawx80/>) > is > not addressed, along with concerns with using undefined entities like > "OAM > node" and "Collector". Below, please find my comments to the > draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-20 </>: > > - Characterization if Passport and Postcard modes in the Introduction > is > not consistent with RFC 9232 where the passport mode is referred to > IOAM as > defined in RFC 9127, while postcard mode - to RFC 9326. According to > RFC > 9232, the passport mode is when telemetry information is collected > along > the path and transported in the trigger packet, while postcard mode - > such > information is collected and transported from each traversed node by > some > mechanism, e.g., over the management plane. > - Combining "Hybrid Type I" with "Passive" in reference to performance > metrics is confusing and inaccurate. RFC 7799 defines hybrid > measurement > methods as a combination of the elements of passive and active > measurement > methods. Furthermore, RFC 7799 identifies two types of hybrid > measurement > methods - Type I (IOAM and Alternate Marking are examples of it) and > Type > II. There's no mention of Hybrid Type I Passive in RFC 7799. > - Another concern with the naming new IPFIX IEs is reference to IP in > "HybridType1_Passive_IP". Is it to signify that the IEs are applicable > only > to delay measurement of the IP flows? But can they be used to export > delay > metrics of, for example, an MPLS flow? > - Some key elements used in the document, e.g., "OAM node" and > "Collector", are underdefined. > - I consider the content of Section 3.2.2 Packet Stream > Generation essential and that the reader must understand any document > referenced in the section. Hence, I believe that references to > [I-D.zhou-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking] and > [I-D.fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark] must be normative, if the Alternate > Marking > method is in the scope of the document. > > I hope that my comments are helpful. > > Regards, > Greg > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 1:46 PM David Dong via RT < > drafts-expert-review-comm...@iana.org> wrote: > > > Hi Greg, > > > > That will be fine, thank you! > > > > Best regards, > > > > David Dong > > IANA Services Sr. Specialist > > > > On Tue Jul 29 20:44:30 2025, gregimir...@gmail.com wrote: > > > Hi David, > > > my apologies for the belated response and missing the deadline. I > > > can > > > review the current version by August 1st. Please let me know if > > > that is > > > acceptable to you. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Greg > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 12:39 PM David Dong via RT < > > > drafts-expert-review-comm...@iana.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > Just a ping on this one if you're available to take another look > > > > at > > this > > > > document. > > > > > > > > Thank you! > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > David Dong > > > > IANA Services Sr. Specialist > > > > > > > > On Wed Jul 16 20:58:45 2025, michael.sch...@hs-esslingen.de > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi David, > > > > > > > > > > As Greg has already reviewed earlier versions of this document, > > > > > I > > > > > believe that he is in a better position to review this > > > > > document. > > > > > > > > > > If Greg is not available, I'd have a look myself. > > > > > > > > > > I have not followed this document in detail so far. As far as I > > > > > can > > > > > see, there has been a OPSAWG list discussion regarding IANA in > > > > > the > > > > > past. For what it is worth, I back some of the questions raised > > > > > by > > > > > Greg in his past e-mail > > > > > ( > > > > > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/kbNvNZgNfDThtg3ZZj9q0Jawx80/ > > > > ). > > > > > And at least in the list archive it is not clear how all of > > > > > them have > > > > > been resolved, as there is only one follow-up posting. For > > > > > instance, > > > > > RFC 7799 Section 3.8 doesn't really define a combination of > > > > > "Hybrid > > I" > > > > > and "Passive", as far as I read the text of RFC 7799. But Greg > > > > > has > > > > > probably more context regarding that discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: David Dong via RT <drafts-expert-review- > > > > > > comm...@iana.org> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 12:01 AM > > > > > > Cc: gregimir...@gmail.com; Scharf, Michael > > > > > > <Michael.Scharf@hs- > > > > > > esslingen.de>; opsawg@ietf.org > > > > > > Subject: [IANA #1422930] expert review for draft-ietf-opsawg- > > > > > > ipfix- > > > > > > on-path- > > > > > > telemetry (performance-metrics) > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Greg Mirsky, Michael Scharf (cc: opsawg wg), > > > > > > > > > > > > As the designated experts for the Performance Metrics > > > > > > Registry, can > > > > > > you > > > > > > review the proposed registrations in > > draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path- > > > > > > telemetry-19 for us? Please see > > > > > > > > > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on- > > > > > > path- > > > > > > telemetry/ > > > > > > > > > > > > The due date is July 28th. > > > > > > > > > > > > If this is OK, when the IESG approves the document for > > > > > > publication, > > > > > > we'll make > > > > > > the registration at: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/performance-metrics/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless you ask us to wait for the other reviewer, we’ll act > > > > > > on the > > > > > > first response > > > > > > we receive. > > > > > > > > > > > > With thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > David Dong > > > > > > IANA Services Sr. Specialist > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
