Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments

Janos Farkas <Janos.Farkas@ericsson.com> Wed, 26 June 2019 08:27 UTC

Return-Path: <Janos.Farkas@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3991C1203DC for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 01:27:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com
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 NHhwVPImT7A0 for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 01:27:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR01-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-ve1eur01on0614.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe1f::614]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88690120219 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 01:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=xp4jUEAJG7kvc87ltReptP0QpKE5BIRD4+ZVQl+Kynk=; b=SMFpcZFQLwU4vRIMiUnV8wm+z7vV8frwQPzUxFuDyazOzvFOSLIx1rxT9RpcvW5tEjp/CDOzuyJhfzjAsy8AR62shdnbMxZsLIE51BdLYSTf3gbhbe0UDfFjKhSiEpRqf/+MATExkYJDImiK04D4X557jcwkeyrCpwzF+BOPxIA=
Received: from VI1PR07MB3440.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.175.244.142) by VI1SPR01MB0366.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.178.120.77) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2032.12; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 08:27:41 +0000
Received: from VI1PR07MB3440.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8d75:e94f:fb0b:9d5]) by VI1PR07MB3440.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8d75:e94f:fb0b:9d5%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2032.012; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 08:27:41 +0000
From: Janos Farkas <Janos.Farkas@ericsson.com>
To: "qiangli (D)" <qiangli3@huawei.com>
CC: "detnet@ietf.org" <detnet@ietf.org>, "shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp" <shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp>, "peter.j.willis@bt.com" <peter.j.willis@bt.com>, Liang GENG <liang.geng@hotmail.com>
Thread-Topic: draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments
Thread-Index: AQHVIAiMvlIW7RTI2kKwIvaJSqO8BaafgoUwgA3IwACAAF+FoA==
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 08:27:40 +0000
Message-ID: <VI1PR07MB3440B125F1D7696FFB71E961F2E20@VI1PR07MB3440.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <BN6PR22MB0771D878C59904BC7E0E0ACC87ED0@BN6PR22MB0771.namprd22.prod.outlook.com> <8aea82da521a4faead2f6cb4652f7d4b@huawei.com> <cd7bbcc689ad4d1e80bb034fab603f65@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <cd7bbcc689ad4d1e80bb034fab603f65@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Janos.Farkas@ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [89.135.192.225]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a8d635f1-7413-4f0d-6bf2-08d6fa1027a5
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:VI1SPR01MB0366;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1SPR01MB0366:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <VI1SPR01MB0366E7059AC1D565CE7F1C3CF2E20@VI1SPR01MB0366.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7219;
x-forefront-prvs: 00808B16F3
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(376002)(366004)(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(346002)(53754006)(199004)(189003)(7696005)(64756008)(86362001)(71200400001)(76116006)(74316002)(81156014)(478600001)(68736007)(486006)(25786009)(9326002)(71190400001)(476003)(256004)(72206003)(186003)(102836004)(7736002)(4326008)(45080400002)(14444005)(26005)(966005)(6436002)(2906002)(73956011)(53546011)(8936002)(11346002)(606006)(236005)(53936002)(66476007)(81166006)(5660300002)(6916009)(9686003)(14454004)(52536014)(316002)(6506007)(6306002)(54906003)(66446008)(76176011)(55016002)(446003)(66066001)(54896002)(6116002)(229853002)(66556008)(790700001)(33656002)(3846002)(66946007)(6246003)(8676002)(99286004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:VI1SPR01MB0366; H:VI1PR07MB3440.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ericsson.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: idqO/DTb8PS0zXvWG9/oy/u36uxTZwRmbnfnGALRMwmNGBb1U7Lj/8oIDmGVwULIBoKxJ/oOxSk2KpVYwDMG5gmhrSTMs6UROQhp80bIlSPs4pR6JIkhAnPD9SspV7IYVGlD9sV3uhWhIfGZmnoQhaX5+caNjdtVC1utyuQAb0m/Wnti3hgGeNgmmH/ep1yIP4at/A5VAV2ZZybwM4w98C+J5IvQPd0bN1+w5KziVGBt3Umxdq6BJpSeFW/dJhbI6OhLXAcnPq35eXcUU5JBLyn+61KfhSeOWKv5wIVgstr+FgwdJ1WCJTATdYSKBv9WrRn5lU9WtnCzuclarFAL2mRj0KPJyrWB2EJO7swyfyudWF9THzCbnVPLm5mJX1zR5o+6oRYf7LyfTcLdazmvAWm96iehHsanFAjRb2sMfk8=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_VI1PR07MB3440B125F1D7696FFB71E961F2E20VI1PR07MB3440eurp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a8d635f1-7413-4f0d-6bf2-08d6fa1027a5
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Jun 2019 08:27:41.0157 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: Janos.Farkas@ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1SPR01MB0366
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/KUxLO4qvHliUwid4MAT3cO1fwbo>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <detnet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 08:27:46 -0000

Hi Cristina,

My understanding of the consensus of the WG based on the Architecture document is that synchronization is acknowledged to be important; however, it is not the job of DetNet to specify the details, solutions, etc.; DetNet just uses what is available, specified by other standards.

Best regards,
Janos

From: detnet <detnet-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of qiangli (D)
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 5:33 AM
To: detnet@ietf.org
Cc: shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp; peter.j.willis@bt.com; Liang GENG <liang.geng@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments

Hi all,

The Req. 2.2 discusses that DetNet should be able to tolerate a certain degree of clock jitter & wander even within a time synchronous domain. We would like to know if you agree or disagree with this requirement. If you think this requirement is necessary, then to what degree of clock jitter & wander do you expect?

BTW, we are going to ask for WG adoption for this document in IETF 105 meeting. That's will be greatly appreciated if you can share your comments to help us further improve this draft.


Best regards,

Cristina QIANG

From: detnet [mailto:detnet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of qiangli (D)
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2019 4:11 PM
To: detnet@ietf.org<mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
Cc: shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp<mailto:shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp>; peter.j.willis@bt.com<mailto:peter.j.willis@bt.com>; Liang GENG <liang.geng@hotmail.com<mailto:liang.geng@hotmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments

Hi all,

This version has collected 7 requirements, and divided these requirements into optional (SHOULD) and mandatory (MUST) two types as following shows. We authors would like to know if this requirement list is complete, and if the classification is appropriate or not.  Your review and comments are highly appropriated.

==========================
Req. 1: Must support the dynamic creation, modification and deletion of deterministic services

Req. 2.1: Should support asynchronous clocks across domains
Req. 2.2 : Should tolerate a certain of clock jitter & wander within a clock synchronous domain

Req. 3: Must support Inter-Continental propagation delay

Req. 4: Should have self-monitoring capability

Req. 5: Should be robust against denial of service attacks

Req. 6: Must tolerate failures of links or nodes and topology changes

Req. 7: Must be scalable
===========================

Best regards,

Cristina QIANG

From: Liang GENG [mailto:liang.geng@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 11:53 AM
To: detnet@ietf.org<mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
Cc: Black, David <David.Black@dell.com<mailto:David.Black@dell.com>>; peter..j.willis@bt.com<mailto:peter.j.willis@bt.com>; shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp<mailto:shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp>; qiangli (D) <qiangli3@huawei.com<mailto:qiangli3@huawei.com>>
Subject: draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments


Dear all,



Since IETF 104, we have carefully revised draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 according to received comments. The latest 02 version was uploaded and available online https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency/.



This new version collects more technical, operational and management requirements of deploying deterministic latency service on layer 3 networks from the perspective of various service providers.



Comments are welcome!



Best regards,

Liang Geng on behavior of co-authors