Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN application in DetNet charter
xiong.quan@zte.com.cn Mon, 29 June 2020 09:21 UTC
Return-Path: <xiong.quan@zte.com.cn>
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 E7DBE3A0CD7 for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 02:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.885
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.885 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 0X2xB-UpuBjo for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 02:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (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 1DBFE3A0CCB for <detnet@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 02:21:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.164.215]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 1C18D41E30822272A3FB; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:21:24 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.238]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id EFDC63C600623D88B1B8; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:21:23 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp04.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.203]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 05T9LFBv059897; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:21:15 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from xiong.quan@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:21:15 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:21:15 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa5ef9b28b72eb79fb
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202006291721150302451@zte.com.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: xiong.quan@zte.com.cn
To: detnet@ietf.org
Cc: lberger@labn.net, agmalis@gmail.com, janos.farkas@ericsson.com
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn 05T9LFBv059897
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/BXdls9LIf9Zp8oO6RpFmSPgdL8g>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN application in DetNet charter
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: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 09:21:42 -0000
Hi Lou, Janos and Andy, Thanks for your clarification! It is very appreciated! I probably understand the scope of the DetNet. The networks which are in a single administrative control are in scope of the DetNet. For example, the mobile backhaul network which is in a single administrative control is defintly included in DetNet. But what about the small networks which belong to different domains and large networks which belong to a single domain? IMO, the description in charter is confuesd. It only mentions the campus-wide networks and private WANs. Best Regards, Quan >Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN application in DetNet charter >"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Sun, 28 June 2020 21:21 UTCShow header >Quan, > Mobile backhaul is absolutely in scope, see section 6 of RFC 8578 for a > discussion. In addition, section 10 talks about its use with 5G bearer > networks. That RFC also has a number of other use cases. > Cheers, > Andy On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 3:28 PM Janos Farkas <Janos.Farkas=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > I fully agree with Lou. > > > > DetNet is NOT limited to small networks. > > As I wrote before, the key point is that DetNet is not for the big I > Internet. One reason is not to try to boil the ocean. > > Note that a key motivation for establishing DetNet was to be able to go > larger scale than TSN. > > > > Regards, > > Janos > > > > *From:* Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 28, 2020 12:28 PM > *To:* xiong.quan@zte.com.cn; detnet@ietf.org> *Cc:* Janos Farkas <Janos.Farkas@ericsson.com>om>; detnet-chairs@ietf.org> *Subject:* Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN application in > DetNet charter > > > > Quan > > The key statement below is "networks that are under a single > administrative control or within a closed group of administrative control" > -- this statement allows for any sized network and does NOT restrict > DetNets to " small networks ". > > I suspect the types of networks you mention below will generally be built > "under a single administrative control or within a closed group of > administrative control". > > Lou > ------------------------------ > > On June 28, 2020 3:42:40 AM <xiong.quan@zte.com.cn> wrote: > > Dear Chairs and WG, > > > > I noticed that in DetNet Charter, it mentions that the networks which WG > foucs on as following shown. > > "The Working Group will initially focus on solutions for networks that are > under a single administrative control or within a closed group of > administrative control; these include not only campus-wide networks but > also can include private WANs. The DetNet WG will not spend energy on > solutions for large groups of domains such as the Internet." > > IMO, this description seenms to restrict the WAN application and limit the > DetNet to the small networks. > > I am not sure the WAN such as Metropolitan area network and Mobile > backhaul network is in the scope of DetNet. > > Could you please make some clarification about that? Thanks! > > > > Best Regards, > > Quan > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > detnet mailing list > > detnet@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet> > > > _______________________________________________ > detnet mailing list > detnet@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>
- [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN applicati… xiong.quan
- Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… Janos Farkas
- Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… xiong.quan
- Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… xiong.quan
- Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… Grossman, Ethan A.
- [Detnet] 答复: [DetNet] Discussion on the WAN appli… xiong.quan