Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] [EXT] DETNET Synchronization Slides

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Mon, 13 February 2017 09:48 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E79F12944C for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:48:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AUCsFInAnheF for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:48:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FE071293FD for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:48:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.11] (unknown [112.204.169.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E5E218013BE for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:48:05 +0100 (CET)
To: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
References: <b6721061760841cc8e71f2634bc3b1b7@IL-EXCH01.marvell.com> <97CA9DEF-1BD1-4317-AD32-95D0E0D90A5D@broadcom.com> <5399b34b24804c13a2d8e171e1677683@IL-EXCH01.marvell.com> <97AF77D4-8378-4BAA-9B5B-F411C4096B28@broadcom.com> <a1e0e31c8d8b403994acd3eed848cba6@IL-EXCH01.marvell.com>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <c55f8670-d4b3-5d31-76ef-19d90f539286@pi.nu>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:48:00 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a1e0e31c8d8b403994acd3eed848cba6@IL-EXCH01.marvell.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/_MtLindi2caiI5pRfxo91uDnqPE>
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] [EXT] DETNET Synchronization Slides
X-BeenThere: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: DetNet WG Data Plane Design Team <detnet-dp-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet-dp-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 09:48:14 -0000

Tal and Jouni,

I'm trying to make heads and tails of this.

I think we have the three scenarios in the slides + 1 or 2 more.

0.5 - raw,   i.e. running over a network without DetNet cpabilities
1.  - Naive, i.e. running over a DetNet network
1.5 - On-path-support, on a subset of the nodes
2.  - On path support (all nodes)
3.  - Time as a service

Nat that we need to include all this in the list, I just want to have
an understanding that DetNet capabilities improve the things.

/Loa

On 2017-02-13 17:01, Tal Mizrahi wrote:
> Hi Jouni,
>
> That is a fair point. If only the PW nodes function as TCs, then indeed the accuracy will be lower.
> I added a clarification about this in slide 6.
>
> The updated slides are attached.
>
> Thanks,
> Tal.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jouni Korhonen [mailto:jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 10:35 PM
>> To: Tal Mizrahi
>> Cc: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [EXT] [Detnet-dp-dt] DETNET Synchronization Slides
>>
>> Tal,
>>
>> I understood that in 2) the TC function would only be in the PW nodes we define
>> leaving all intermediate “normal” LSRs between PW nodes as a source of higher
>> inaccuracy. If this was not a correct understanding then the value in 2) is likely
>> too high.
>>
>> - Jouni
>>
>>
>>> On 08 Feb 2017, at 23:22, Tal Mizrahi <talmi@marvell.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jouni,
>>>
>>> Sorry for not explaining the accuracy numbers on slide 6 further. I made some
>> changes following the discussion, and also added notes saying that the accuracy
>> will depend on the network topology and on the number of hops.
>>>
>>> Regarding approach 2, I believe sub-microsecond accuracy can certainly be
>> achieved using transparent clocks in a real network. There are quite a few
>> publications that show this. Here are a couple:
>>> - For example, China Mobile have revealed in a keynote lecture in ISPCS 2014
>> that they have measured an accuracy of 266 ns over 30 hops of transparent
>> clocks. Unfortunately, this presentation is not in the public domain, but a short
>> version of it is available  (https://www.ietf.org/mail-
>> archive/web/tictoc/current/pdfp9ceHphbcE.pdf).
>>> - Another example:
>> http://wwwen.zte.com.cn/endata/magazine/ztecommunications/2010Year/no3
>> /articles/201009/t20100913_191838.html
>>> But again, this entirely depends on the nature of the network.
>>>
>>> Regarding approach 1, the accuracy will entirely depend on the network
>> topology (the number of hops, the physical distance, the type of intermediate
>> nodes, the delay variation). Hundreds of microseconds is just an example. Some
>> of the research I took part in showed that in a multi-site public cloud network you
>> can achieve a precision on the order of hundreds of microseconds using PTP
>> without on-path support
>> (https://sites.google.com/site/talmizrahihome/files/TaaSInfocomFinal.pdf?attred
>> irects=0). But again, this entirely depends on the nature of the network.
>>>
>>> Please let me know if there are further comments.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tal.
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jouni Korhonen [mailto:jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 8:15 PM
>>>> To: Tal Mizrahi
>>>> Cc: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
>>>> Subject: [EXT] Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] DETNET Synchronization Slides
>>>>
>>>> External Email
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Thanks Tal,
>>>>
>>>> Didn’t we also agree adjusting the slide 6 “typical accuracy” numbers:
>>>> 1) <1ms or hundreds of us
>>>> 2) <tens of us
>>>> 3) <1us
>>>>
>>>> - Jouni
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jouni Korhonen, Broadcom Ltd.
>>>> M: +1-408-391-7160
>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 7, 2017, at 10:51 PM, Tal Mizrahi <talmi@marvell.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> The slides from today’s weekly meeting are attached.
>>>>> I slightly updated them after the meeting based on the comments.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Tal.
>>>>> <Synchronization in
>>>> DETNET.pptx>_______________________________________________
>>>>> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
>>>>> Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt
>>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
> Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt
>

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64