Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol
draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-10

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, ippm-chairs@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org, Tal Mizrahi <tal.mizrahi.phd@gmail.com>, tal.mizrahi.phd@gmail.com, ietf@kuehlewind.net, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, draft-ietf-ippm-stamp@ietf.org
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-10.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol'
  (draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-10.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the IP Performance Measurement Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Mirja K├╝hlewind and Magnus Westerlund.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-stamp/


Technical Summary

   This document describes a Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol
   which enables the measurement of both one-way and round-trip
   performance metrics like delay, delay variation, and packet loss.

Working Group Summary

   The draft was first submitted in October 2017, has been reviewed by a fair 
   number of people in the IPPM working group, has had a fair number of 
   supporters, and no objections from the working group. The IPPM working 
   group is also working on a companion draft, draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-yang, 
   which defines a YANG data model for STAMP. This companion draft will 
   be sent to the IESG for publication in the future.

Document Quality

   The current version of the draft is clear, seems to have resolved all the 
   issues, and has the consensus of the working group. One of the main 
   issues that was discussed in the context of this draft is the security 
   considerations. Two main questions were raised: one regarding the size 
   of the integrity protection HMAC, and the other regarding whether 
   encryption is required for STAMP or not. Arguments were made both ways. 
   After IETF 103 the authors proposed the solution that is in the current 
   draft with no objections from the working group: regarding the first issue, 
   the HMAC is based on a SHA-256 truncated to 128 bits, and regarding the 
   second issue, the draft does not define an encryption mechanism, but 
   states that encryption may be provided at higher layers.

Personnel

  The document shepherd is Tal Mizrahi, and the responsible area director is Mirja K├╝hlewind.