Dear Amanda,

Apologies for not being clear. Please leave the templates as they are.

Best wishes
Thomas

-----Original Message-----
From: Amanda Baber via RT <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2026 11:35 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Graf Thomas, SCS-INI-NET-VNC-E2E <[email protected]>; 
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
[email protected]; [email protected]; 
[email protected]
Subject: [IANA #1448936] IANA actions for RFC-to-be 9951 
(draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23)


Be aware: This is an external email.



Hi Thomas,

Resending this question. Thanks!

Amanda

On Fri Apr 03 18:17:13 2026, amanda.baber wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Do you want us to remove Sections 4.4.2.2, 4.4.2.3, and 4.4.2.4 for
> OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Mean, remove Sections 4.4.2.1,
> 4.4.2.3, and 4.4.2.4 for OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Min,
> etc.? Or just leave the templates as they are now?
>
> thanks,
> Amanda
>
> On Fri Apr 03 06:13:49 2026, [email protected] wrote:
> > Dear Amanda,
> >
> > Thanks a lot. I reviewed both registries and they look good to me.
> >
> > Regarding your question on action 2. The reason why the performance
> > metrics 4.4.2 subsections have "OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_" in
> > the title name is because with the exception of the output types,
> > all definitions for each entry are the same. To avoid repeating
> > section 4,
> > 4 times, we opted to put the "OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_" in
> > the
> > 4.4.2 subsections. That helps readability and makes it clear that
> > only this changes among OWDelay_HybridType1_IP performance metrics.
> >
> > Therefore I think it is reasonable to refer to
> > "OWDelay_HybridType1_IP" in section 4.4.2. To make it clear that
> > "The one-way delay of one IP packet is a Singleton" refers to
> > OWDelay_HybridType1_IP. I suggest to leave it as suggested.
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Thomas
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amanda Baber via RT <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Friday, April 3, 2026 4:55 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Cc: Graf Thomas, SCS-INI-NET-VNC-E2E <[email protected]>;
> > rfc- [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; alex.huang- [email protected]
> > Subject: [IANA #1448936] IANA actions for RFC-to-be 9951
> > (draft-ietf-
> > opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23)
> >
> >
> > Be aware: This is an external email.
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Authors,
> >
> > Can you check that these actions have been completed correctly? I
> > also have a question about each of them.
> >
> > ACTION 1:
> >
> > The following entries have been added to the IPFIX Information
> > Elements registry:
> >
> > ElementID: 530
> > Name: pathDelayMeanDeltaMicroseconds Abstract Data Type: unsigned32
> > Data Type Semantics: deltaCounter
> > Status: current
> > Description: This Information Element identifies the mean path delay
> > of all packets in the Flow, in microseconds, between an OAM header
> > encapsulating node and the local node with the OAM domain (either an
> > OAM header transit node or an OAM header decapsulating node),
> > according to OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Mean in the IANA
> > [Performance Metric] Registry.
> > Additional Information: OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Mean
> > in
> > the IANA [Performance Metric] registry.
> > Reference: [RFC-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23]
> > Revision: 0
> > Date: 2026-04-02
> >
> > ElementID: 531
> > Name: pathDelayMinDeltaMicroseconds
> > Abstract Data Type: unsigned32
> > Data Type Semantics: deltaCounter
> > Status: current
> > Description: This Information Element identifies the lowest path
> > delay of all packets in the Flow, in microseconds, between an OAM
> > header encapsulating node and the local node with the OAM domain
> > (either an OAM header transit node or an OAM header decapsulating
> > node), according to the OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Min
> > in the IANA [Performance Metric] Registry.
> > Additional Information: OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Min
> > in the IANA [Performance Metric] registry.
> > Reference: [RFC-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23]
> > Revision: 0
> > Date: 2026-04-02
> >
> > ElementID: 532
> > Name: pathDelayMaxDeltaMicroseconds
> > Abstract Data Type: unsigned32
> > Data Type Semantics: deltaCounter
> > Status: current
> > Description: This Information Element identifies the highest path
> > delay of all packets in the Flow, in microseconds, between an OAM
> > header encapsulating node and the local node with the OAM domain
> > (either an OAM header transit node or an OAM header decapsulating
> > node), according to OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Max in
> > the IANA [Performance Metric] Registry.
> > Additional Information: OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Max
> > in the IANA [Performance Metric] registry.
> > Reference: [RFC-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23]
> > Revision: 0
> > Date: 2026-04-02
> >
> > ElementID: 533
> > Name: pathDelaySumDeltaMicroseconds
> > Abstract Data Type: unsigned64
> > Data Type Semantics: deltaCounter
> > Status: current
> > Description: This Information Element identifies the sum of the path
> > delay of all packets in the Flow, in microseconds, between an OAM
> > header encapsulating node and the local node with the OAM domain
> > (either an OAM header transit node or an OAM header decapsulating
> > node), according to OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Sum in
> > the IANA [Performance Metric] Registry.
> > Additional Information: OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Sum
> > in the IANA [Performance Metric] registry.
> > Reference: [RFC-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23]
> > Revision: 0
> > Date: 2026-04-02
> >
> > Note: we'll update the references to point to RFC 9511 once the
> > final link is available.
> >
> > QUESTION:
> >
> > Should we provide links to the individual performance metric
> > registration templates as well as the registry?
> >
> > Please see
> > https://ww/
> > w.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fipfix&data=05%7C02%7CThomas.Graf%40swissc
> > om.com%7C45a2517dcfe7489acedb08de97490df1%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9beec35d
> > 19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639114537472023972%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbX
> > B0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbC
> > IsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vf%2Bue15WDgjD2Zn%2FVC4h5dPYEl
> > nyo8oEj2M4hkz%2BE3c%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > ACTION 2:
> >
> > The following entries have been added to the Performance Metrics
> > registry:
> >
> > Identifier: 27
> > Name: OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Mean
> > URI:
> > https://ww/
> > w.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fperformance-&data=05%7C02%7CThomas.Graf%4
> > 0swisscom.com%7C45a2517dcfe7489acedb08de97490df1%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9
> > beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639114537472074149%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d
> > 8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjo
> > iTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=pjpAR2%2F7ir3EGRI0j3Whd
> > BJ%2FhC0ABl6yf2wTn6slky0%3D&reserved=0
> > metrics/OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Mean
> > Description: This metric assesses the mean of one-way delays of all
> > successfully forwarded IP packets constituting a single Flow. The
> > measurement of one-sway delay is based on a single Observation Point
> > [RFC7011] somewhere in the network.
> > Reference: [RFC-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23]
> > Change Controller: IETF
> > Version: 1.0
> >
> > Identifier: 28
> > Name: OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Min
> > URI:
> > https://ww/
> > w.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fperformance-&data=05%7C02%7CThomas.Graf%4
> > 0swisscom.com%7C45a2517dcfe7489acedb08de97490df1%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9
> > beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639114537472094891%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d
> > 8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjo
> > iTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=urDtTclmn3SAC%2BJP1mAyr
> > s9hslpPfBcwrh3%2FhVrefP0%3D&reserved=0
> > metrics/OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Min
> > Description: This metric assesses the minimum of one-way delays of
> > all successfully forwarded IP packets constituting a single Flow.
> > The measurement of one-way delay is based on a single Observation
> > Point [RFC7011] somewhere in the network.
> > Reference: [RFC-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23]
> > Change Controller: IETF
> > Version: 1.0
> >
> > Identifier: 29
> > Name: OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Max
> > URI:
> > https://ww/
> > w.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fperformance-&data=05%7C02%7CThomas.Graf%4
> > 0swisscom.com%7C45a2517dcfe7489acedb08de97490df1%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9
> > beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639114537472116194%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d
> > 8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjo
> > iTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2FMbwh2Q9vCm38kDNnuUMx
> > 6EhNqI9jx%2B%2BiOQVZ3B8Zsc%3D&reserved=0
> > metrics/OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Max
> > Description: This metric assesses the maximum of one-way delays of
> > all successfully forwarded IP packets constituting a single Flow.
> > The measurement of one-way delay is based on a single Observation
> > Point [RFC7011] somewhere in the network.
> > Reference: [RFC-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23]
> > Change Controller: IETF
> > Version: 1.0
> >
> > Identifier: 30
> > Name: OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Sum
> > URI:
> > https://ww/
> > w.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fperformance-&data=05%7C02%7CThomas.Graf%4
> > 0swisscom.com%7C45a2517dcfe7489acedb08de97490df1%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9
> > beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639114537472138983%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d
> > 8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjo
> > iTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=FjzwI55aZ5fqLX%2B6KlvXX
> > rNCCAKd4Hv2IjABKKnif1Y%3D&reserved=0
> > metrics/OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC9951_Seconds_Sum
> > Description: This metric assesses the maximum of one-way delays of
> > all successfully forwarded IP packets constituting a single Flow.
> > The measurement of one-way delay is based on a single Observation
> > Point [RFC7011] somewhere in the network.
> > Reference: [RFC-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-23]
> > Change Controller: IETF
> > Version: 1.0
> >
> > QUESTION:
> >
> > For each registration template, I've removed the IDs, Names, URIs,
> > and Descriptions associated with the other three registrations. I
> > haven't done this for the "Reference Definition" field, though,
> > because I'm not sure whether the three lines that precede Section
> > 4.4.2.1 would need to be left in place, edited, or removed. What do
> > you want us to do with this text?
> >
> > ==
> >
> > For all output types:
> >
> > OWDelay_HybridType1_IP:  The one-way delay of one IP packet is a
> >    Singleton.
> >
> > For each <statistic> Singleton, one of the following subsections
> > applies.
> >
> > ==
> >
> > Please see
> > https://ww/
> > w.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fperformance-metrics&data=05%7C02%7CThomas
> > .Graf%40swisscom.com%7C45a2517dcfe7489acedb08de97490df1%7C364e5b87c1
> > c7420d9beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639114537472160958%7CUnknown%7CTWFp
> > bGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIs
> > IkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Ff7A%2FXT8y4Z%2F
> > ltR8jan5M0QaH%2F2SwJB3B8emgiU0Htc%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > thanks,
> > Amanda
> >
> > On Tue Mar 31 05:54:08 2026, [email protected] wrote:
> > > Hi IANA,
> > >
> > > Re:
> > > > After discussion with the authors, we will hold off on
> > > > performing the IANA actions for this document until the RFC
> > > > number is assigned.
> > >
> > >
> > > The number 9951 has been assigned to this document. It is
> > > currently in
> > > AUTH48 state.
> > >
> > > The files are here:
> > >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9951.txt
> > >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9951.html
> > >
> > > https://che01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/%2Fauthors%2Frfc9951.pdf&data=05%7C02%7CThomas.G
> > > raf%40swisscom.com%7C45a2517dcfe7489acedb08de97490df1%7C364e5b87c1
> > > c7420d9beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639114537472240828%7CUnknown%7CTW
> > > FpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4z
> > > MiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JlD3KSubAo
> > > pLwQgSTsE6LywBBkCd2437uTaT4yu8yqw%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > https://che01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/%2Fauthors%2Frfc9951-diff.html&data=05%7C02%7CTh
> > > omas.Graf%40swisscom.com%7C45a2517dcfe7489acedb08de97490df1%7C364e
> > > 5b87c1c7420d9beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639114537472265461%7CUnknow
> > > n%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOi
> > > JXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5tDx
> > > 3SFYxsEa%2B%2BTYmg4OjX10LB7CAbgwXbgQTYHWht4%3D&reserved=0 (all
> > > changes from the approved I-D)
> > >
> > > https://www/.
> > > rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9951-
> > > rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7CThomas.
> > > Graf%40swisscom.com%7C737f1f73f9764e0c574a08de912c6ea9%7C364e5b87c
> > > 1c74
> > > 20d9beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C639107817366923959%7CUnknown%7CTWFpb
> > > GZsb
> > > 3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkF
> > > OIjo
> > > iTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Dj9FItIy2R%2BzN4Zj5de
> > > 09Ff
> > > adO%2B4XP%2BnGj1dzcHgkz0%3D&reserved=0 (side by side diff)
> > >
> > > Thank you.
> > >
> > > Alice Russo
> > > RFC Production Center
> > >
> > > > On Oct 15, 2025, at 5:09 PM, Sabrina Tanamal via RT <drafts-
> > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > RFC Editor,
> > > >
> > > > After discussion with the authors, we will hold off on
> > > > performing the IANA actions for this document until the RFC
> > > > number is assigned.
> > > > The Performance Metric registrations in Sections 4 and 6.1 will
> > > > need to reference [RFC-to-be], so we plan to add these entries
> > > > to the registries once the RFC reference is available.
> > > >
> > > > Similarly, the IPFIX registrations in Section 6.2 include
> > > > references to the Performance Metric registrations, so we will
> > > > also defer those actions until the RFC number is available.
> > > >
> > > > For your reference, we have reserved the following values so
> > > > that you may proceed with publication of the document:
> > > >
> > > > Performance Metric Values:
> > > >
> > > > 27 OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC[RFC-to-be]_Seconds_Mean
> > > > 28 OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC[RFC-to-be]_Seconds_Min
> > > > 29 OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC[RFC-to-be]_Seconds_Max
> > > > 30 OWDelay_HybridType1_IP_RFC[RFC-to-be]_Seconds_Sum
> > > >
> > > > IPFIX:
> > > >
> > > > 530 pathDelayMeanDeltaMicroseconds
> > > > 531 pathDelayMinDeltaMicroseconds
> > > > 532 pathDelayMaxDeltaMicroseconds
> > > > 533 pathDelaySumDeltaMicroseconds
> > > >
> > > > Please let us know if you have any questions or need any
> > > > additional information. Please reply to this message to
> > > > acknowledge receipt.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > Sabrina Tanamal
> > > > IANA Operations Manager
> > > >
> >

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to