| Internet-Draft | Update of the STAMP CoS Extension | March 2025 |
| Mirsky | Expires 2 October 2025 | [Page] |
This document describes an optional extension to the Class of Service monitoring functionality of Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol that enables the upstream monitoring of the Explicit Congestion Notification and thus updates RFC 8972.¶
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 2 October 2025.¶
Copyright (c) 2025 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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶
[RFC8972] defined several extensions to Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP). Among those is Class of Service TLV that enables monitoring of the Differential Services Code Point (DSCP) marking in downstream and upstream directions. Also, Class of Service TLV supports downstream monitoring of the Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN). Experience deploying STAMP and its extensions demonstrated that it is helpful to an operator to monitor ECN's consistency in the upstream direction. This specification defines the extension of the Class of Service TLV in a backward compatible manner to support monitoring of ECN in the upstream direction of the STAMP test session.¶
CoS Class of Service¶
DSCP Differentiated Services Code Point¶
ECN Explicit Congestion Notification¶
STAMP Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol¶
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.¶
The STAMP Session-Sender MAY include a Class of Service (CoS) TLV in the STAMP test packet. The format of the CoS TLV is presented in Figure 1.¶
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|STAMP TLV Flags| CoS Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| DSCP1 | DSCP2 |ECN| RP|REC| Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where fields are defined as the following:¶
Processing and handling of DSCP1, DSCP2, and ECN fields as defiend in Section 4.4 of [RFC8972]. A system that supports this specification MUST set the ECN value in the data plane encapsulation of the reflected STAMP test packet to the value of the REC field. Furthermore, such a system MUST add 0b10 to the value of the RP field in the Class of Service TLV in the reflected test packet. As a result, the Session-Sender can detect whether the recommended values for DSCP and ECN fields in the reflected packets were used by inspecting the value of the RP field in the received reflected test packet.¶
The extended Class of Service TLV defined in this dradft s backward compatible with the specification in Section 4.4 of [RFC8972]. Consider a case when implementation that supports this specification performs as Session-Sender, nd the intended Session-Reflector support of the Class of Service TLV is according to Session 4.4 of [RFC8972]. If the operator requires monitoring ECN in the upstream direction, the value of the REC field will be set to a non-zero value. Because the Session-Reflector would treat the REC field as part of the Reserved field and ignore its value, the Session-Reflector would not add 0b10 to the value of the RP field in the reflected STAMP packet. Consequently, the Session-Sender will determine that the ECN value in the IP/UDP encapsulation of the reflected test packet was not set to the requested value.¶
This document makes no requests to IANA.¶
This document extends the functionality of the Class of Service TLV ([RFC8972]) and inherits all the security considerations applicable to the base STAMP specification [RFC8762] and [RFC8972].¶
As this specification defined the mechanism to test ECN mapping, this document inherits all the security considerations discussed in [RFC2474]. Monitoring and optional control of ECN for a reflected STAMP test packet using the extended CoS TLV may be used across the Internet so that the Session-Sender and the Session-Reflector are located in different domains.¶
TBA¶