draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-00.txt   draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-01.txt 
IPPM H. Song IPPM H. Song
Internet-Draft Futurewei Internet-Draft Futurewei
Intended status: Standards Track B. Gafni Intended status: Standards Track B. Gafni
Expires: August 9, 2020 Mellanox Technologies, Inc. Expires: February 6, 2021 Mellanox Technologies, Inc.
T. Zhou T. Zhou
Z. Li Z. Li
Huawei Huawei
F. Brockners F. Brockners
S. Bhandari S. Bhandari
R. Sivakolundu R. Sivakolundu
Cisco Cisco
T. Mizrahi, Ed. T. Mizrahi, Ed.
Huawei Smart Platforms iLab Huawei Smart Platforms iLab
February 6, 2020 August 5, 2020
In-situ OAM Direct Exporting In-situ OAM Direct Exporting
draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-00 draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-01
Abstract Abstract
In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) is used In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) is used
for recording and collecting operational and telemetry information. for recording and collecting operational and telemetry information.
Specifically, IOAM allows telemetry data to be pushed into data Specifically, IOAM allows telemetry data to be pushed into data
packets while they traverse the network. This document introduces a packets while they traverse the network. This document introduces a
new IOAM option type called the Direct Export (DEX) option, which is new IOAM option type called the Direct Export (DEX) option, which is
used as a trigger for IOAM data to be directly exported without being used as a trigger for IOAM data to be directly exported without being
pushed into in-flight data packets. pushed into in-flight data packets.
skipping to change at page 1, line 46 skipping to change at page 1, line 46
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 9, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 6, 2021.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 3, line 10 skipping to change at page 3, line 10
This document defines a new IOAM option type (also known as an IOAM This document defines a new IOAM option type (also known as an IOAM
type) called the Direct Export (DEX) option. This option is used as type) called the Direct Export (DEX) option. This option is used as
a trigger for IOAM nodes to export IOAM data to a receiving entity a trigger for IOAM nodes to export IOAM data to a receiving entity
(or entities). A "receiving entity" in this context can be, for (or entities). A "receiving entity" in this context can be, for
example, an external collector, analyzer, controller, decapsulating example, an external collector, analyzer, controller, decapsulating
node, or a software module in one of the IOAM nodes. node, or a software module in one of the IOAM nodes.
This draft has evolved from combining some of the concepts of PBT-I This draft has evolved from combining some of the concepts of PBT-I
from [I-D.song-ippm-postcard-based-telemetry] with immediate from [I-D.song-ippm-postcard-based-telemetry] with immediate
exporting from [I-D.mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags]. exporting from [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-flags].
2. Conventions 2. Conventions
2.1. Requirement Language 2.1. Requirement Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2.2. Terminology 2.2. Terminology
skipping to change at page 8, line 24 skipping to change at page 8, line 24
the use cases that the Hop_Lim/Node_ID cannot cover, and on the the use cases that the Hop_Lim/Node_ID cannot cover, and on the
other hand it does not require transit switches to update the other hand it does not require transit switches to update the
option if it is not supported or disabled. Further discussion is option if it is not supported or disabled. Further discussion is
required about the tradeoff between the two alternatives. required about the tradeoff between the two alternatives.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data] [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]
Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Pignataro, C., Gredler, H., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., and T. Mizrahi, "Data Fields
Leddy, J., Youell, S., Mizrahi, T., Mozes, D., Lapukhov, for In-situ OAM", draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-10 (work in
P., remy@barefootnetworks.com, r., daniel.bernier@bell.ca, progress), July 2020.
d., and J. Lemon, "Data Fields for In-situ OAM", draft-
ietf-ippm-ioam-data-08 (work in progress), October 2019.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[I-D.mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags] [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-flags]
Mizrahi, T., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Sivakolundu, R., Mizrahi, T., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Sivakolundu, R.,
Pignataro, C., Kfir, A., Gafni, B., Spiegel, M., and J. Pignataro, C., Kfir, A., Gafni, B., Spiegel, M., and J.
Lemon, "In-situ OAM Flags", draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam- Lemon, "In-situ OAM Flags", draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-02
flags-00 (work in progress), July 2019. (work in progress), July 2020.
[I-D.song-ippm-postcard-based-telemetry] [I-D.song-ippm-postcard-based-telemetry]
Song, H., Zhou, T., Li, Z., Shin, J., and K. Lee, Song, H., Zhou, T., Li, Z., Shin, J., and K. Lee,
"Postcard-based On-Path Flow Data Telemetry", draft-song- "Postcard-based On-Path Flow Data Telemetry", draft-song-
ippm-postcard-based-telemetry-06 (work in progress), ippm-postcard-based-telemetry-07 (work in progress), April
October 2019. 2020.
[I-D.spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport] [I-D.spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport]
Spiegel, M., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., and R. Spiegel, M., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., and R.
Sivakolundu, "In-situ OAM raw data export with IPFIX", Sivakolundu, "In-situ OAM raw data export with IPFIX",
draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport-02 (work in progress), draft-spiegel-ippm-ioam-rawexport-03 (work in progress),
July 2019. March 2020.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Haoyu Song Haoyu Song
Futurewei Futurewei
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
17 lines changed or deleted 15 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/