[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-srpm

IPPM Working Group                                        R. Gandhi, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                               C. Filsfils
Intended status: Informational                       Cisco Systems, Inc.
Expires: April 23, 2021                                         D. Voyer
                                                             Bell Canada
                                                                 M. Chen
                                                                  Huawei
                                                             B. Janssens
                                                                    Colt
                                                        October 20, 2020


          TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing Networks
                    draft-gandhi-ippm-twamp-srpm-00

Abstract

   Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm.  SR is
   applicable to both Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-MPLS) and IPv6
   (SRv6) data planes.  This document describes RFC 5357 (Two-Way Active
   Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) Light) extensions for Delay and Loss
   Measurement in Segment Routing networks, for both SR-MPLS and SRv6
   data planes.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 23, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents



Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.3.  Reference Topology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Probe Query Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Control Code Field Extension for TWAMP Light Messages . .   4
     3.2.  Loss Measurement Query Message Extensions . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Probe Response Message  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.1.  Loss Measurement Response Message Extensions  . . . . . .   8
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12

1.  Introduction

   Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm and
   greatly simplifies network operations for Software Defined Networks
   (SDNs).  SR is applicable to both Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-
   MPLS) and IPv6 (SRv6) data planes.  Built-in SR Performance
   Measurement (PM) is one of the essential requirements to provide
   Service Level Agreements (SLAs).

   The One-Way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) defined in [RFC4656]
   and Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) defined in [RFC5357]
   provide capabilities for the measurement of various performance
   metrics in IP networks using probe messages.  These protocols rely on
   control-channel signaling to establish a test-channel over an UDP
   path.  The TWAMP Light [Appendix I in RFC5357] [BBF.TR-390] provides
   simplified mechanisms for active performance measurement in Customer
   IP networks by provisioning UDP paths and eliminates the need for
   control-channel signaling.  As described in Appendix A of [RFC8545],
   TWAMP Light mechanism is informative only.  These protocols lack




Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


   support for direct-mode Loss Measurement (LM) to detect actual
   Customer data traffic loss which is required in SR networks.

   This document describes RFC 5357 (Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol
   (TWAMP) Light) extensions for Delay and Loss Measurement in Segment
   Routing networks, for both SR-MPLS and SRv6 data planes.

2.  Conventions Used in This Document

2.1.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] [RFC8174]
   when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

2.2.  Abbreviations

   BSID: Binding Segment ID.

   DM: Delay Measurement.

   HMAC: Hashed Message Authentication Code.

   LM: Loss Measurement.

   MPLS: Multiprotocol Label Switching.

   NTP: Network Time Protocol.

   OWAMP: One-Way Active Measurement Protocol.

   PM: Performance Measurement.

   PTP: Precision Time Protocol.

   SID: Segment ID.

   SL: Segment List.

   SR: Segment Routing.

   SRH: Segment Routing Header.

   SR-MPLS: Segment Routing with MPLS data plane.

   SRv6: Segment Routing with IPv6 data plane.




Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


   TWAMP: Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol.

2.3.  Reference Topology

   In the reference topology shown below, the sender node R1 initiates a
   performance measurement probe query message and the reflector node R5
   sends a probe response message for the query message received.  The
   probe response message is typically sent to the sender node R1.

                          t1                t2
                         /                   \
                +-------+       Query         +-------+
                |       | - - - - - - - - - ->|       |
                |   R1  |=====================|   R5  |
                |       |<- - - - - - - - - - |       |
                +-------+       Response      +-------+
                         \                   /
                          t4                t3
                 Sender                        Reflector

                         Reference Topology

3.  Probe Query Message

3.1.  Control Code Field Extension for TWAMP Light Messages

   In this document, the Control Code field is defined for delay and
   loss measurement probe query messages for TWAMP Light in
   unauthenticated and authenticated modes.  The modified delay
   measurement probe query message format is shown in Figure 1.  This
   message format is backwards compatible with the message format
   defined in [RFC5357] as its reflector ignores the received field
   (previously identified as MBZ).  With this field, the reflector node
   does not require any additional state for PM (recall that in SR
   networks, the state is in the probe packet and signaling of the
   parameters is undesired).  The usage of the Control Code is not
   limited to the SR and can be used for non-SR network.














Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


    .                                                               .
    .                                                               .
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                          Timestamp                            |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |         Error Estimate        |  MBZ                          |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |         MBZ                                   |Se Control Code|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    .                                                               .
    .                                                               .

          Figure 1: Sender Control Code in TWAMP Light DM Message

   Sender Control Code: Set as follows in TWAMP Light probe query
   message.

   In a Query:

       0x0: Out-of-band Response Requested.  Indicates that the probe
       response is not required over the same path in the reverse
       direction.  This is also the default behavior.

       0x1: In-band Response Requested.  Indicates that this query has
       been sent over a bidirectional path and the probe response is
       required over the same path in the reverse direction.

       0x2: No Response Requested.

3.2.  Loss Measurement Query Message Extensions

   In this document, TWAMP Light probe query messages for loss
   measurement are defined as shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3.  The
   message formats are hardware efficient due to well-known locations of
   the counters and payload small in size.  They are stand-alone and
   similar to the delay measurement message formats (e.g. location of
   the Counter and Timestamp).  They also do not require backwards
   compatibility and support for the existing DM message formats from
   [RFC5357] as different user-configured destination UDP port is used
   for loss measurement.










Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Sequence Number                        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Transmit Counter                       |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |X|B| Reserved  | Block Number  | MBZ                           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |         MBZ                                   |Se Control Code|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    .                                                               .
    .                        Packet Padding                         .
    .                                                               .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

    Figure 2: TWAMP Light LM Probe Query Message - Unauthenticated Mode































Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Sequence Number                        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        MBZ (12 octets)                        |
    |                                                               |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Transmit Counter                       |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |X|B| Reserved  | Block Number  | MBZ                           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |         MBZ                                   |Se Control Code|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        HMAC (16 octets)                       |
    |                                                               |
    |                                                               |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    .                                                               .
    .                        Packet Padding                         .
    .                                                               .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Figure 3: TWAMP Light LM Probe Query Message - Authenticated Mode

   Sequence Number (32-bit): As defined in [RFC5357].

   Transmit Counter (64-bit): The number of packets or octets sent by
   the sender node in the query message and by the reflector node in the
   response message.  The counter is always written at the well-known
   location in the probe query and response messages.

   Receive Counter (64-bit): The number of packets or octets received at
   the reflector node.  It is written by the reflector node in the probe
   response message.

   Sender Counter (64-bit): This is the exact copy of the transmit
   counter from the received query message.  It is written by the
   reflector node in the probe response message.

   Sender Sequence Number (32-bit): As defined in [RFC5357].

   Sender TTL: As defined in [RFC5357].



Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


   LM Flags: The meanings of the Flag bits are:

      X: Extended counter format indicator.  Indicates the use of
      extended (64-bit) counter values.  Initialized to 1 upon creation
      (and prior to transmission) of an LM query and copied from an LM
      query to an LM response message.  Set to 0 when the LM message is
      transmitted or received over an interface that writes 32-bit
      counter values.

      B: Octet (byte) count.  When set to 1, indicates that the Counter
      1-4 fields represent octet counts.  The octet count applies to all
      packets within the LM scope, and the octet count of a packet sent
      or received includes the total length of that packet (but excludes
      headers, labels, or framing of the channel itself).  When set to
      0, indicates that the Counter fields represent packet counts.

   Block Number (8-bit): The Loss Measurement using Alternate-Marking
   method defined in [RFC8321] requires to color the data traffic.  To
   be able to correlate the transmit and receive traffic counters of the
   matching color, the Block Number (or color) of the traffic counters
   is carried by the probe query and response messages for loss
   measurement.  The Block Number can also be used to aggregate
   performance metrics collected.

   HMAC: The probe message in authenticated mode includes a key Hashed
   Message Authentication Code (HMAC) [RFC2104] hash.  Each probe query
   and response messages are authenticated by adding Sequence Number
   with Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) TLV.  It can use HMAC-
   SHA-256 truncated to 128 bits (similarly to the use of it in IPSec
   defined in [RFC4868]); hence the length of the HMAC field is 16
   octets.

   HMAC uses its own key and the mechanism to distribute the HMAC key is
   outside the scope of this document.

   In authenticated mode, only the sequence number is encrypted, and the
   other payload fields are sent in clear text.  The probe message may
   include Comp.MBZ (Must Be Zero) variable length field to align the
   packet on 16 octets boundary.

4.  Probe Response Message

4.1.  Loss Measurement Response Message Extensions

   In this document, TWAMP Light probe response message formats are
   defined for loss measurement as shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5.





Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Sequence Number                        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Transmit Counter                       |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |X|B| Reserved  | Block Number  | MBZ                           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Receive Counter                        |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Sender Sequence Number                 |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Sender Counter                         |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |X|B| Reserved  |Sender Block Nu|   MBZ                         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |  Sender TTL   |                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                               +
    |                                                               |
    .                                                               .
    .                        Packet Padding                         .
    .                                                               .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Figure 4: TWAMP Light LM Probe Response Message - Unauthenticated
                                   Mode

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Sequence Number                        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        MBZ (12 octets)                        |
    |                                                               |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Transmit Counter                       |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |X|B| Reserved  | Block Number  | MBZ                           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        MBZ (4 octets)                         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


    |                        Receive Counter                        |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        MBZ (8 octets)                         |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Sender Sequence Number                 |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        MBZ (12 octets)                        |
    |                                                               |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Sender Counter                         |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |X|B| Reserved  |Sender Block Nu|   MBZ                         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        MBZ (4 octets)                         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |  Sender TTL   |                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                               |
    |                        MBZ (15 octets)                        |
    |                                                               |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        HMAC (16 octets)                       |
    |                                                               |
    |                                                               |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    .                                                               .
    .                        Packet Padding                         .
    .                                                               .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 5: TWAMP Light LM Probe Response Message - Authenticated Mode

5.  Security Considerations

   The performance measurement is intended for deployment in well-
   managed private and service provider networks.  As such, it assumes
   that a node involved in a measurement operation has previously
   verified the integrity of the path and the identity of the far-end
   reflector node.





Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


   If desired, attacks can be mitigated by performing basic validation
   and sanity checks, at the sender, of the counter or timestamp fields
   in received measurement response messages.  The minimal state
   associated with these protocols also limits the extent of measurement
   disruption that can be caused by a corrupt or invalid message to a
   single query/response cycle.

   Use of HMAC-SHA-256 in the authenticated mode protects the data
   integrity of the probe messages.  Cryptographic measures may be
   enhanced by the correct configuration of access-control lists and
   firewalls.

6.  IANA Considerations

   This document does not require any IANA action.

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC4656]  Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M.
              Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol
              (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4656>.

   [RFC5357]  Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J.
              Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
              RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5357>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2104]  Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC: Keyed-
              Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2104, February 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2104>.






Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


   [RFC4868]  Kelly, S. and S. Frankel, "Using HMAC-SHA-256, HMAC-SHA-
              384, and HMAC-SHA-512 with IPsec", RFC 4868,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4868, May 2007,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4868>.

   [RFC8321]  Fioccola, G., Ed., Capello, A., Cociglio, M., Castaldelli,
              L., Chen, M., Zheng, L., Mirsky, G., and T. Mizrahi,
              "Alternate-Marking Method for Passive and Hybrid
              Performance Monitoring", RFC 8321, DOI 10.17487/RFC8321,
              January 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8321>.

   [RFC8545]  Morton, A., Ed. and G. Mirsky, Ed., "Well-Known Port
              Assignments for the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol
              (OWAMP) and the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol
              (TWAMP)", RFC 8545, DOI 10.17487/RFC8545, March 2019,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8545>.

   [BBF.TR-390]
              "Performance Measurement from IP Edge to Customer
              Equipment using TWAMP Light", BBF TR-390, May 2017.

Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to thank Thierry Couture for the discussions
   on the use-cases for Performance Measurement in Segment Routing.  The
   authors would also like to thank Greg Mirsky for reviewing this
   document and providing useful comments and suggestions.  The authors
   would like to acknowledge the earlier work on the loss measurement
   using TWAMP described in draft-xiao-ippm-twamp-ext-direct-loss.

Authors' Addresses

   Rakesh Gandhi (editor)
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   Canada

   Email: rgandhi@cisco.com


   Clarence Filsfils
   Cisco Systems, Inc.

   Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com








Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft TWAMP Light Extensions for Segment Routing   October 2020


   Daniel Voyer
   Bell Canada

   Email: daniel.voyer@bell.ca


   Mach(Guoyi) Chen
   Huawei

   Email: mach.chen@huawei.com


   Bart Janssens
   Colt

   Email: Bart.Janssens@colt.net



































Gandhi, et al.           Expires April 23, 2021                [Page 13]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/