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

["qiangli (D)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Shunsuke,

Thank you for your comments. We will try to analyze  "scalability" in detail next version. But I'm afraid we couldn't go so deep as you suggested, since like the load of process, the chips are OS/hardware related, is not in IETF's scope.

Best regards,

Cristina QIANG

From: Shunsuke Homma [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 6:27 PM
To: qiangli (D) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; 'Liang GENG' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments

Hi Cristina,

>From operator's aspect, in addition to the number of network devices, the number of accommodated end devices and services would be important. Also, the number of network devices may be broken down to some factors such as load of processes or unnecessity of specific device/chip. There may other requirements on scalability.

Best regards,

Shunsuke

From: qiangli (D) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 5:48 PM
To: Shunsuke Homma; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; 'Liang GENG'
Subject: RE: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments

Hi Shunsuke,

Thanks for your support. "Scalability" is indeed an important requirement, especially for operators when considering actual deployment. DetNet has considered this point, the DetNet architecture proposed to improve scalability through flow aggregation. Except for scale to a great amount of traffic flows,   current Req. 7 also mentions the number of network devices.  Do you recommend splitting Req.7 from these two aspects?


Best regards,

Cristina QIANG

From: Shunsuke Homma [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 3:29 PM
To: qiangli (D) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; 'Liang GENG' <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: RE: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments

Hi,

I agree that these requirements are important, especially from operator's aspect.  Services and applications which are latency sensitive will increase more, and it would be required that enough dynamicity and scalability for utilizing it in carrier-wide networks.

Regarding req 7, "scalable" has wide meaning, for example implementation or management aspects, and I hope it is broken down to more concrete requirements in the next revision.

Best regards,

Shunsuke


From: detnet [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of qiangli (D)
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 12:33 PM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; Liang GENG
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:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of qiangli (D)
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2019 4:11 PM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; Liang GENG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
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:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 11:53 AM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: Black, David <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; qiangli (D) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
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