Re: [Detnet] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-detnet-problem-statement-03

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

This is basically ready, but I think a few items need attention before 
this goes to the IESG:

    As a result of this work, it will be possible to establish a multi-
    hop path over the IP network,

SB> I think that should be an IP or MPLS network

=============

   The goals of Deterministic Networking are to enable the migration of
    applications that use special-purpose fieldbus technologies (HDMI,
    CANbus, ProfiBus, etc... even RS-232!) to packet technologies in
    general, and the Internet Protocol in particular, and to support both
    these new applications, and existing packet network applications,
    over the same physical network.

SB> I think there should be some text here indicating that DN is
SB> required to support these migrations when there are critical
SB> timing and reliability issues.
SB>
SB> Where such issues are not critical, the Pseudowires or L2TP tunnels
SB> will normally be adequate. Indeed they have proved adequate for TDM
SB> and SDH emulation which are quite fickle services to emulate.
  
==============

        *  Need a packet loss ratio beyond the classical range for a
           particular medium, in the range of 10^-9 to 10^-12, or better,
           on Ethernet, and in the order of 10^-5 in Wireless Sensor Mesh
           Networks;

SB> I am worried whether or not we are setting unreasonable expectations
SB> here.  How many packet copies do we think we need to send
SB> to reduce the BER by 10?

===============

    4.  Robust defenses against misbehaving hosts, routers, or bridges,
SB> s/defenses/defences/
        both in the data and control planes, with guarantees that a
        critical flow within its guaranteed resources cannot be affected
        by other flows whatever the pressures on the network;

=================

These limits may depend in the technology that is used to
    seu th epath up, whether it is centralized or distributed.

SB> Hopefully no my fat fingers in my marked up copy, but it should be:
SB> "set the path"

=================

    3.  The path is installed using RSVP-TE, associated with flow
        identification, per-hop behavior such as replication and
        elimination, blocked resources, and flow timing information.

SB> This is too prescriptive on approach for a problem statement.
SB> There might well be an approach that surfaces from the Segment Routing
SB> or VPN+ work based on use of the IGP.


================

   Security must cover:

SB> I think should be "Security must also cover". If not the dynamic
SB> requirement which is unique to DN should be top of the list.

  o  the protection of the signaling protocol

SB> True, but isn't this currently out of scope (and not sure about the next point)


Best Regards

- Stewart