Re: [Detnet] Queueing mechanism evaluation examples Thu, 09 November 2023 08:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6EA3C15107A; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 00:11:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.903
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NUAmFcq02FPY; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 00:11:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6E0CC151067; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 00:11:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4SQvmm6qK8z4xPG3; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 16:11:36 +0800 (CST)
Received: from ([]) by with SMTP id 3A98BNOp085623; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 16:11:24 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from
Received: from mapi (njy2app01[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 16:11:26 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2023 16:11:26 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2af9654c942effffffffda3-af22c
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: 3A98BNOp085623
X-Fangmail-Gw-Spam-Type: 0
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 654C9438.003/4SQvmm6qK8z4xPG3
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] Queueing mechanism evaluation examples
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2023 08:11:48 -0000

Hi Jinoo,

Thanks for your comments. The slides is updated.
For the topology envisioned in my mind is actually the same as what Toerless provided before. I think it may cover the simulation topology as shown in your paper.



From: JinooJoung <>
To: 彭少富10053815;
Cc: <>; <>; <>;
Date: 2023年11月09日 12:20
Subject: Re: [Detnet] Queueing mechanism evaluation examples

Shofu, thanks for the suggestion.
Your scenario seems to contain only a single hop with the flows of monotonically increasing latency bounds specifications.   
I suggest that for a scenario to be effective in evaluating our queuing solutions, the following requirements should be met.

1. The network should have a large enough diameter, such as more than 8 hops or so.
2. The network should have a complex topology including mesh or ring.
3. The flows should have TSpecs, including max burst size and average rate.
4. The flows should have RSpecs, which reflect realistic latency & jitter bounds such as those of video, XR gaming, or industrial control loop.

My paper below has the simulation setup which meets these requirements.
If you are interested, please take a look. 

Joung J., Kwon J., Ryoo J-D., Cheung T., "Scalable flow isolation with work conserving stateless core fair queuing for deterministic networking" IEEE Access, vol. 11, Sep. 2023. doi: 0.1109/ACCESS.2023.3318479

Best regards,

On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 12:11 PM <> wrote:

Hi WG,

During the session, most people hope to have one or several common examples to evaluate various queueing mechanisms. 
I provided an initial example (see the attachement). 
Hope it can be helpful and welcome more examples with typical and real requirements can be added.


 detnet mailing list