Subject: [ippm] Reflect-Octets: New TWAMP Test Packet Format?

From: Al Morton <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:28:57 -0500

IPPM,

Len Ciavattone and I introduced the possibility
for a significant test packet format overhaul last
November at IETF-73:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/08nov/slides/ippm-4/ippm-4.htm

and in the draft
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-reflect-octets-00#section-5

We were proposing to make some changes as part of the Reflect-Octets
draft/work item, because it makes sense to deal with several format
aspects at once.

There were some suggestions made at the mike and captured in the
minutes:

>Open question: consider change the structure of the TWAMP structure
>to TLV type structure to make it more extensible.
>
>Questions from the floor: Roman Kraznowski said he had some things he'd
>like to add.  He'd post to the list.

Please take a look at the slides and the draft
and make further comments, so we can determine a path forward.

thanks and regards,
Al and Len

---

From: "Krzanowski, Roman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:26:14 -0500

Al
I am for the TLV structure as it would open TWAMP for future
enhancements as well as 
For some propratary  extensions , if needed vendor specific TLV code,
optional TLVs and so on...
In most of the control algorithms ( and other) I see TLv as an elegant
solution to the data structures 

We would need to preserve the compatibility with the current format but
.. I guess this canbe done
My 3cs..
rmk

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Al Morton
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 4:29 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [ippm] Reflect-Octets: New TWAMP Test Packet Format?

IPPM,

and in the draft
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-reflect-octets-00#secti
on-5

thanks and regards,
Al and Len

_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm