IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Detnet] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-16

"Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com> Fri, 25 May 2018 21:36 UTC

Return-Path: <David.Black@dell.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 8F5C9129515; Fri, 25 May 2018 14:36:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.711
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.711 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dell.com header.b=EsrDBMqP; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=emc.com header.b=GY1Oge55
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 i73mJA8PHRox; Fri, 25 May 2018 14:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from esa2.dell-outbound.iphmx.com (esa2.dell-outbound.iphmx.com [68.232.149.220]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E1D5128959; Fri, 25 May 2018 14:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dell.com; i=@dell.com; q=dns/txt; s=smtpout; t=1527284180; x=1558820180; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=3p0VfoInpwoUTz+rzJzUw3MgdxrtG8pHcbBj6VfSXyU=; b=EsrDBMqP2OjmgKETVwH+cb0B3jqdPnGCwOKh6z8dmrDSspt5W7d9ieNr ThRfSu0IHPdjgA+pxj58vgA+8lORrgBLdp003LypJx0c0b/4QvJNsuvI4 SND4TOi+cnLCqZDaBsWWuSc879egktoEt7UT2PIQdFXt05Ae79iVbbxSi U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2GZAACIgQhbmGKa6ERcHAEBAQQBAQoBAYJwgSgOfSgKi3GMbYF5gQ+TOYE9OwsYCwuDeEYCghAhNBgBAgEBAQEBAQIBAQIQAQEBAQEICwsGKCMMgjUkAQ4vHCEIBgEBAQEBAScBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEXAkMBEgIYAQEBBAEBGx0GHw8LAQsEAgEIDgMEAQELFAkHJwsUCQgCBAENBQiDGgKBfwEOqUyCdoVLgXQDBYc6fIFVPoQcgxEBAYFigy6CJJhhAwQCApAWg2+FMoIqiWaGdgIEAgQFAhSBQYILcFCCQ4Iug06FFIU+b4xLKoEEgRkBAQ
X-IPAS-Result: A2GZAACIgQhbmGKa6ERcHAEBAQQBAQoBAYJwgSgOfSgKi3GMbYF5gQ+TOYE9OwsYCwuDeEYCghAhNBgBAgEBAQEBAQIBAQIQAQEBAQEICwsGKCMMgjUkAQ4vHCEIBgEBAQEBAScBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEXAkMBEgIYAQEBBAEBGx0GHw8LAQsEAgEIDgMEAQELFAkHJwsUCQgCBAENBQiDGgKBfwEOqUyCdoVLgXQDBYc6fIFVPoQcgxEBAYFigy6CJJhhAwQCApAWg2+FMoIqiWaGdgIEAgQFAhSBQYILcFCCQ4Iug06FFIU+b4xLKoEEgRkBAQ
Received: from esa4.dell-outbound2.iphmx.com ([68.232.154.98]) by esa2.dell-outbound.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 May 2018 16:36:15 -0500
From: "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>
Received: from mailuogwdur.emc.com ([128.221.224.79]) by esa4.dell-outbound2.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 May 2018 03:36:15 +0600
Received: from maildlpprd52.lss.emc.com (maildlpprd52.lss.emc.com [10.106.48.156]) by mailuogwprd54.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id w4PLaCJS014066 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 25 May 2018 17:36:14 -0400
X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd54.lss.emc.com w4PLaCJS014066
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=emc.com; s=jan2013; t=1527284174; bh=Qumsv5Nd6PxT+3HOjFkA/L+qGYo=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; b=GY1Oge55SEY9PIg52Of1NDLlhbwV3ZANjNUILYFOgXTPVlYhjjoqk00cSbYut97IR QiMX1jDQeGgFPItG8rGRMet7qrYD0YwdNRl7sAVB3eki05p5iMiMWyBHMTLXI/NoGI Ge5eUXQA1rPFmG3Z1Auqfk5PdIlWeybwzwPET0z4=
X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd54.lss.emc.com w4PLaCJS014066
Received: from mailusrhubprd52.lss.emc.com (mailusrhubprd52.lss.emc.com [10.106.48.25]) by maildlpprd52.lss.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Fri, 25 May 2018 17:35:59 -0400
Received: from MXHUB319.corp.emc.com (MXHUB319.corp.emc.com [10.146.3.97]) by mailusrhubprd52.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id w4PLa0eI026479 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 25 May 2018 17:36:01 -0400
Received: from MX307CL04.corp.emc.com ([fe80::849f:5da2:11b:4385]) by MXHUB319.corp.emc.com ([10.146.3.97]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Fri, 25 May 2018 17:36:00 -0400
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>
CC: DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Detnet] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-16
Thread-Index: AQHT7RHcTGt/VQ9Sq0+bZHFsONjV6KRBBT8A
Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 21:36:00 +0000
Message-ID: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D24327794936301489B2@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com>
References: <30319033-7d4a-20c5-f4a6-35fe638cd08a@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <30319033-7d4a-20c5-f4a6-35fe638cd08a@labn.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.238.21.33]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sentrion-Hostname: mailusrhubprd52.lss.emc.com
X-RSA-Classifications: public
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/8ir36fBvkKdFUHojwWQn0JQEsRI>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-16
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 25 May 2018 21:36:23 -0000

Looking at Section 11 (which is starting to tease out common requirements)
from a Transport (Area) viewpoint, I have a couple of questions:

11.1.6.  Guaranteed End-to-End Delivery

   Packets sent over DetNet are guaranteed not to be dropped by the
   network due to congestion.  (Packets may however be dropped for
   intended reasons, e.g.  per security measures).

David> What about media (e.g., CRC) errors?

11.1.9.  Unused Reserved BW to be Available to Best Effort Traffic

   If bandwidth reservations are made for a stream but the associated
   bandwidth is not used at any point in time, that bandwidth is made
   available on the network for best-effort traffic.  If the owner of
   the reserved stream then starts transmitting again, the bandwidth is
   no longer available for best-effort traffic, on a moment-to-moment
   basis.  Note that such "temporarily available" bandwidth is not
   available for time-sensitive traffic, which must have its own
   reservation.

David> Is this just about bandwidth, or a more general notion of network
resources including capacity for queueing/buffering, even though bandwidth
may be the most user-visible resource?

Thanks, --David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: detnet [mailto:detnet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 8:31 AM
> To: DetNet WG
> Cc: DetNet Chairs
> Subject: [Detnet] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-16
> 
> All,
> 
> This starts a two-week working group last call for
> draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-16
> 
> The working group last call ends on May 30.
> Please send your comments to the detnet mailing list.
> 
> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document
> and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome!
> This is useful and important, even from authors.
> 
> Thank you,
> DetNet Chairs
> 
> _______________________________________________
> detnet mailing list
> detnet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email