



IPPM Working Group                                                X. Min
Internet-Draft                                                   S. Peng
Intended status: Standards Track                               ZTE Corp.
Expires: 11 December 2025                                          X. He
                                                           China Telecom
                                                             9 June 2025


                      STAMP Extensions for DetNet
                     draft-xp-ippm-detnet-stamp-02

Abstract

   Deterministic Networking (DetNet) provides a capability for the
   delivery of data flows with extremely low packet loss rates and
   bounded end-to-end delivery latency.  The enabler to DetNet is a
   proper queue scheduling mechanism, such as timeslot based queueing
   and forwarding mechanism, which requires every router along the
   DetNet path to collect the basic timeslot mapping relationship
   between itself and its adjacent router.  This document defines two
   Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) TLVs, to acquire
   the basic timeslot mapping relationship between the local router and
   its adjacent router.

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 11 December 2025.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.






Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


   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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  TLVs for DetNet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Timeslot Mapping TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  Orchestration Period Mapping TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   Deterministic Networking (DetNet) provides a capability for the
   delivery of data flows with extremely low packet loss rates and
   bounded end-to-end delivery latency.  DetNet is for networks that are
   under a single administrative control or within a closed group of
   administrative control.  [RFC8578] presents the DetNet use cases and
   [RFC8655] provides the overall architecture for DetNet.

   [I-D.peng-detnet-packet-timeslot-mechanism] specifies a queue
   scheduling mechanism that can be used for DetNet.  To make the
   Timeslot based Queueing and Forwarding (TQF) mechanism work, it's
   required for every hop router along the DetNet path to collect the
   basic timeslot mapping relationship between itself and its adjacent
   router.  The basic timeslot mapping relationship is not related to
   any individual flow, but to a network topological properties (such as
   the beginning time of the period configured by each node, link
   propagation delay, etc).







Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


   The Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) provides a
   capability for the measurement of various performance metrics in IP
   networks.  [RFC8762] defines the STAMP base functionalities and
   [RFC8972] specifies the use of optional STAMP extensions that use
   Type-Length-Value (TLV) encoding.

   STAMP test packets are transmitted along an IP path between a
   Session-Sender and a Session-Reflector.  The IP path can be either a
   single-hop path or a multi-hop path, depending on the application
   scenario of STAMP.

   This document defines two STAMP TLVs, to acquire the timeslot mapping
   relationship between the local router and its adjacent router, i.e.,
   the mapping direction is from the local router to its adjacent
   router.

2.  Conventions

2.1.  Requirements Language

   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.

2.2.  Abbreviations

   DetNet: Deterministic Networking

   OP: Orchestration Period

   OPL: Orchestration Period Length

   STAMP: Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol

   TLV: Type-Length-Value

   TQF: Timeslot based Queueing and Forwarding

3.  TLVs for DetNet










Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


3.1.  Timeslot Mapping TLV

   The Timeslot Mapping TLV enables collection of the mapping
   relationship of timeslots between the Session-Sender and the Session-
   Reflector.  The timeslot mapping is based on a specific orchestration
   period at both the Session-Sender and the Session-Reflector, and the
   timeslot mapping may be different among different orchestration
   periods.


    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|   Type=TBD1   |         Length=20             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |               Orchestration Period Length (OPL)               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Session-Sender Slot Length  |     Session-Sender Slot X     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                Session-Sender Trans-Deviation E               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Session-Reflector Slot Length |   Session-Reflector Slot Y    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |Reflector's Slot Remaining Time|  Return Code  |   Reserved    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                       Figure 1: Timeslot Mapping TLV

   The fields are defined as follows:

   *  STAMP TLV Flags: The STAMP TLV Flags follow the procedures
      described in [RFC8972].

   *  Type: Type (value TBD1) for the Timeslot Mapping TLV.

   *  Length: A two-octet field, set equal to the length of the Value
      field in octets.  The length is 20 octets.

   *  Orchestration Period Length: A four-octet field that characterizes
      the orchestration period in microsecond at the Session-Sender.
      The Session-Reflector uses this period as a key to match the TQF
      scheduling instance.

   *  Session-Sender Slot Length: A two-octet field that characterizes
      the Session-Sender timeslot in microsecond.






Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


   *  Session-Sender Slot X: A two-octet field that characterizes the
      Session-Sender timeslot number (X) for which the Session-Sender
      queries the mapping relationship.

   *  Session-Sender Trans-Deviation E: A four-octet field that
      characterizes the time difference in microsecond between the begin
      of timeslot (X) and the time sending the STAMP packet, i.e., E =
      sending time - X.begin.  This field may be zero, positive, or
      negative.

   *  Session-Reflector Slot Length: A two-octet field that
      characterizes the Session-Reflector timeslot in microsecond.

   *  Session-Reflector Slot Y: A two-octet field that characterizes the
      Session-Reflector timeslot number (Y) for which the Session-
      Reflector responds the mapping relationship.

   *  Reflector's Slot Remaining Time: A two-octet field that
      characterizes the time difference in microsecond between the end
      of timeslot (X) of Session-Sender and the end of timeslot (Y) of
      Session-Reflector, where the end of timeslot (X) equals to the
      time receiving the STAMP packet plus Session-Sender Slot Length
      and minus time difference (E).  This field may be zero, positive,
      or negative.

   *  Return Code: A one-octet field that identifies the OPL matching
      result at the Session-Reflector.  It MUST be zeroed by the
      Session-Sender on transmit and ignored by the Session-Reflector on
      receipt.  The Session-Reflector MUST fill it with values defined
      as follows.

      -  0x01: TQF instance for the specific OPL is supported

      -  0x02: TQF instance for the specific OPL is not supported

      -  All other values are reserved for future use.

   *  Reserved: A one-octet field that MUST be zeroed on transmission
      and ignored on receipt.

   The STAMP Session-Sender that includes the Timeslot Mapping TLV sets
   the value of the OPL field based on which the timeslot mapping is
   queried.  Also, the Session-Sender sets the values of the Session-
   Sender Slot Length field, the Session-Sender Slot X field and the
   Session-Sender Trans-Deviation E field within the designated
   orchestration period.





Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


   The STAMP Session-Reflector that received the test packet with the
   Timeslot Mapping TLV MUST include the Timeslot Mapping TLV in the
   reflected test packet.  The Session-Reflector MUST set the values of
   the OPL, Session-Sender Slot Length, Session-Sender Slot X, and
   Session-Sender Trans-Deviation E fields equal to the values of the
   corresponding fields from the test packet it has received.  Also, the
   Session-Reflector MUST set the values of the Session-Reflector Slot
   Length field, the Session-Reflector Slot Y field, and the Reflector's
   Slot Remaining Time field within the designated orchestration period.
   The Session-Reflector Slot Y is determined by the expected time
   receiving the STAMP packet, which equals to the real time receiving
   the STAMP packet plus Session-Sender Slot Length and minus time
   difference E.  Besides, the Session-Reflector MUST set the value of
   the Return Code field to reflect the operational result.

   By the received Timeslot Mapping TLV in the reflected test packet,
   the Session-Sender can acquire the mapping relationship between the
   timeslot number (X) at the Session-Sender and the timeslot number (Y)
   at the Session-Reflector, as well as Y's remaining time.  In
   addition, the Session-Sender can figure out the mapping relationship
   between any other timeslot number (I) at the Session-Sender and the
   timeslot number (J) at the Session-Reflector, by some calculations on
   the TLV fields' values.  The mathematical formula to derive the
   timeslot mapping relationship between the Session-Sender's timeslot
   (I) and the Session-Reflector's timeslot (J) is outside the scope of
   this document and may refer to
   [I-D.peng-detnet-packet-timeslot-mechanism].

3.2.  Orchestration Period Mapping TLV

   The Orchestration Period Mapping TLV is an alternative to the
   Timeslot Mapping TLV, it also enables collection of the mapping
   relationship of timeslots between the Session-Sender and the Session-
   Reflector.  The difference between the two TLVs is that the Timeslot
   Mapping TLV is used when the timeslot number (X) is provisioned at
   the Session-Sender, and the Orchestration Period Mapping TLV is used
   when the timeslot number (X) is not provisioned at the Session-
   Sender.













Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


    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|   Type=TBD2   |         Length=16             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |               Orchestration Period Length (OPL)               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                Session-Sender Trans-Deviation E               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Session-Sender Slot Length  | Session-Reflector Slot Length |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Reflector's OP Remaining Time |  Return Code  |   Reserved    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                 Figure 2: Orchestration Period Mapping TLV

   The fields are defined as follows:

   *  STAMP TLV Flags: The STAMP TLV Flags follow the procedures
      described in [RFC8972].

   *  Type: Type (value TBD2) for the Orchestration Period Mapping TLV.

   *  Length: A two-octet field, set equal to the length of the Value
      field in octets.  The length is 16 octets.

   *  Orchestration Period Length: A four-octet field that characterizes
      the orchestration period in microsecond at the Session-Sender.
      The Session-Reflector uses this period as a key to match the TQF
      scheduling instance.

   *  Session-Sender Trans-Deviation E: A four-octet field that
      characterizes the time difference in microsecond between the begin
      of orchestration period and the time sending the STAMP packet,
      i.e., E = sending time - OP.begin.  This field may be zero,
      positive, or negative.

   *  Session-Sender Slot Length: A two-octet field that characterizes
      the Session-Sender timeslot in microsecond.

   *  Session-Reflector Slot Length: A two-octet field that
      characterizes the Session-Reflector timeslot in microsecond.









Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


   *  Reflector's OP Remaining Time: A two-octet field that
      characterizes the time difference in microsecond between the end
      of the orchestration period of Session-Sender and the end of
      orchestration period of Session-Reflector, where the end of the
      orchestration period of Session-Sender equal to the time receiving
      the STAMP packet minus time difference E.  This field may be zero,
      positive, or negative.

   *  Return Code: A one-octet field that identifies the OPL matching
      result at the Session-Reflector.  It MUST be zeroed by the
      Session-Sender on transmit and ignored by the Session-Reflector on
      receipt.  The Session-Reflector MUST fill it with values defined
      as follows.

      -  0x01: TQF instance for the specific OPL is supported

      -  0x02: TQF instance for the specific OPL is not supported

      -  All other values are reserved for future use.

   *  Reserved: A one-octet field that MUST be zeroed on transmission
      and ignored on receipt.

   The STAMP Session-Sender that includes the Orchestration Period
   Mapping TLV sets the value of the OPL field based on which the
   timeslot mapping is queried.  Also, the Session-Sender sets the
   values of the Session-Sender Slot Length field and the Session-Sender
   Trans-Deviation E field within the designated orchestration period.

   The STAMP Session-Reflector that received the test packet with the
   Orchestration Period Mapping TLV MUST include the Orchestration
   Period Mapping TLV in the reflected test packet.  The Session-
   Reflector MUST set the values of the OPL, Session-Sender Slot Length,
   and Session-Sender Trans-Deviation E fields equal to the values of
   the corresponding fields from the test packet it has received.  Also,
   the Session-Reflector MUST set the values of the Session-Reflector
   Slot Length field and the Reflector's OP Remaining Time field within
   the designated orchestration period.  Besides, the Session-Reflector
   MUST set the value of the Return Code field to reflect the
   operational result.











Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 8]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


   By the received Orchestration Period Mapping TLV in the reflected
   test packet, the Session-Sender can figure out the mapping
   relationship between any timeslot number (I) at the Session-Sender
   and the timeslot number (J) at the Session-Reflector, by some
   calculations on the TLV fields' values.  The mathematical formula to
   derive the timeslot mapping relationship between the Session-Sender's
   timeslot (I) and the Session-Reflector's timeslot (J) is outside the
   scope of this document and may refer to
   [I-D.peng-detnet-packet-timeslot-mechanism].

4.  Security Considerations

   Security issues discussed in [RFC8762], [RFC8972], and [RFC9503]
   apply to this document.

   Basic validation checks can be performed to mitigate the potential
   attacks, for example, the Orchestration Period Length field of the
   Timeslot Mapping TLV and the Orchestration Period Mapping TLV is
   larger than the Session-Sender Slot Length field of the two TLVs in
   the received STAMP packets at the Session-Reflector.

   The usage of STAMP extensions defined in this document is intended
   for deployment between two neighbouring nodes in a single network
   administrative domain.  As such, the Session-Sender and Session-
   Reflector can be configured to check the source address while the
   received STAMP packet carries the extensions defined in this
   document, and if it's determined the source address doesn't belong to
   its adjacent nodes, the received STAMP packet MUST be dropped with a
   notification sent to the network management system.

5.  IANA Considerations

   From the "STAMP TLV Types" registry in the "Simple Two-way Active
   Measurement Protocol (STAMP) TLV Types" namespace, two new values for
   the Timeslot Mapping TLV and the Orchestration Period Mapping TLV are
   requested from IANA as follows:

      +=======+=======================================+===========+
      | Value | Description                           | Reference |
      +=======+=======================================+===========+
      | TBD1  | Timeslot Mapping                      |This draft |
      +-------+---------------------------------------+-----------+
      | TBD2  | Orchestration Period Mapping          |This draft |
      +-------+---------------------------------------+-----------+







Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025                [Page 9]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


6.  Acknowledgements

   TBD.

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>.

   [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>.

   [RFC8762]  Mirsky, G., Jun, G., Nydell, H., and R. Foote, "Simple
              Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol", RFC 8762,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8762, March 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8762>.

   [RFC8972]  Mirsky, G., Min, X., Nydell, H., Foote, R., Masputra, A.,
              and E. Ruffini, "Simple Two-Way Active Measurement
              Protocol Optional Extensions", RFC 8972,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8972, January 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8972>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.peng-detnet-packet-timeslot-mechanism]
              Peng, S., Liu, P., Basu, K., Liu, A., Yang, D., and G.
              Peng, "Timeslot Queueing and Forwarding Mechanism", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-peng-detnet-packet-
              timeslot-mechanism-11, 8 April 2025,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-peng-detnet-
              packet-timeslot-mechanism-11>.

   [RFC8578]  Grossman, E., Ed., "Deterministic Networking Use Cases",
              RFC 8578, DOI 10.17487/RFC8578, May 2019,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8578>.

   [RFC8655]  Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,
              "Deterministic Networking Architecture", RFC 8655,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8655, October 2019,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8655>.





Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025               [Page 10]

Internet-Draft         STAMP Extensions for DetNet             June 2025


   [RFC9503]  Gandhi, R., Ed., Filsfils, C., Chen, M., Janssens, B., and
              R. Foote, "Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol
              (STAMP) Extensions for Segment Routing Networks",
              RFC 9503, DOI 10.17487/RFC9503, October 2023,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9503>.

Authors' Addresses

   Xiao Min
   ZTE Corp.
   Nanjing
   China
   Phone: +86 18061680168
   Email: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn


   Shaofu Peng
   ZTE Corp.
   Nanjing
   China
   Email: peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn


   Xiaoming He
   China Telecom
   Guangzhou
   China
   Email: hexm4@chinatelecom.cn























Min, et al.             Expires 11 December 2025               [Page 11]
