| Network Working Group | G. Mirsky |
| Internet-Draft | X. Min |
| Intended status: Standards Track | ZTE Corp. |
| Expires: September 2, 2018 | G. Jun |
| ZTE Corporation | |
| H. Nydell | |
| Accedian Networks | |
| R. Foote | |
| Nokia | |
| March 1, 2018 |
Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol Optional Extensions
draft-mirsky-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-00
This document describes an optional extensions to Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) which enable measurement performance metrics in addition to ones enabled by the STAMP base specification.
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 September 2, 2018.
Copyright (c) 2018 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 (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.
Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) [I-D.ietf-ippm-stamp] supports use of optional extensions that use Type-Length-Value (TLV) encoding. Such extensions are to enhance the STAMP base functions, such as measurement of one-way and round-trip delay, latency, packet loss, as well as ability to detect packet duplication and out-of-order delivery of the test packets. This specification provides definitions of optional STAMP extensions, their formats and theory of operation.
STAMP - Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol
DSCP - Differentiated Services Code Point
ECN - Explicit Congestion Notification
NTP - Network Time Protocol
PTP - Precision Time Protocol
HMAC Hashed Message Authentication Code
TLV Type-Length-Value
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
STAMP Session-Sender transmits test packets toward STAMP Session-Reflector. STAMP Session-Reflector receives Session-Sender's packet and acts according to the configuration and optional control information communicated in the Session-Sender's test packet. STAMP defines two different test packet formats, one for packets transmitted by the STAMP-Session-Sender and one for packets transmitted by the STAMP-Session-Reflector. STAMP supports three modes: unauthenticated, authenticated, and encrypted. Unauthenticated STAMP test packets are compatible on the wire with unauthenticated TWAMP-Test [RFC5357] packet formats.
By default STAMP uses symmetrical packets, i.e. size of the packet transmitted by Session-Reflector equals to the size of the packet received by the Session-Reflector.
TBA
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Extra Padding Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ Extra Padding ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Extra Padding TLV
TBA
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Location Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source MAC |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | Reserved A |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Destination IP Address ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Source IP Address ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Dest.port | Src.Port | Reserved B |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Session-Reflector Location TLV
STAMP session-sender MAY include the Location TLV to request information from the session-reflector. The session-sender SHOULD NOT fill any information fields except for Type and Length. The session-reflector MUST validate the Length value against address family of the transport encapsulating the STAMP test packet. If the value of the Length field is invalid, the session-reflector MUST zero all fields and MUST NOT return any information to the session-sender. The session-reflector MUST ignore all other fields of the received Location TLV.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Timestamp Information Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Synchronization Source | Timestamp Method |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: Timestamp Information TLV
STAMP session-sender MAY include the Timestamp Information TLV to request information from the session-reflector. The session-sender SHOULD NOT fill any information fields except for Type and Length. The session-reflector MUST validate the Length value of the STAMP test packet. If the value of the Length field is invalid, the session-reflector MUST zero all fields and MUST NOT return any information to the session-sender.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Class of Service Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Op | Reserved | DSCP |ECN|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: Class of Service TLV
The STAMP session-sender MAY include Class of Service TLV in the STAMP test packet. If the Class of Service TLV is present in the STAMP test packet and the value of the Op field equals Report (TBA5) value Section 5.4, then the STAMP session-reflector MUST copy Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) and Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) values from the received STAMP test packet into DSCP and ECN fields of the Class of Service TLV of the reflected STAMP test packet. If the value of the Op field equals Set and Report (TBA6) Section 5.4, then the STAMP session-reflector MUST use DSCP value from the Class of Service TLV in the received STAMP test packet as DSCP value of STAMP reflected test packet and MUST copy DSCP and ECN values of the received STAMP test packet into DSCP and ECN fields of Class of Service TLV in the STAMP reflected packet.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Direct Measurement Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Session-Sender Tx counter (S_TxC) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Session-Reflector Rx counter (R_RxC) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Session-Reflector Tx counter (R_TxC) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: Direct Measurement TLV
The Direct Measurement TLV enables collection of "in profile" IP packets that had been transmitted and received by the Session-Sender and Session-Reflector respectfully. The definition of "in-profile packet" is outside the scope of this document.
IANA is requested to create STAMP TLV Type registry. All code points in the range 1 through 32759 in this registry shall be allocated according to the "IETF Review" procedure as specified in [RFC8126]. Code points in the range 32760 through 65279 in this registry shall be allocated according to the "First Come First Served" procedure as specified in [RFC8126]. Remaining code points are allocated according to the Table 1:
| Value | Description | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Reserved | This document |
| 1- 32759 | Unassigned | IETF Review |
| 32760 - 65279 | Unassigned | First Come First Served |
| 65280 - 65519 | Experimental | This document |
| 65520 - 65534 | Private Use | This document |
| 65535 | Reserved | This document |
This document defines the following new values in STAMP TLV Type registry:
| Value | Description | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| TBA1 | Extra Padding | This document |
| TBA2 | Location | This document |
| TBA3 | Timestamp Information | This document |
| TBA4 | Class of Service | This document |
| TBA5 | Direct Measurement | This document |
TBD
TBD
TBD
Use of HMAC in authenticated and encrypted modes may be used to simultaneously verify both the data integrity and the authentication of the STAMP test packets.
TBD
| [I-D.ietf-ippm-stamp] | Mirsky, G., Jun, G. and H. Nydell, "Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-00, January 2018. |
| [RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997. |
| [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. |
| [RFC8126] | Cotton, M., Leiba, B. and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017. |
| [RFC8174] | Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017. |