Re: [Detnet] DetNet working meetings on scaling/queueing

["Black, David" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Michael,
[cc’ing the mailing list]

These open working meetings are open to all members of the WG, so they’re effectively public.

This first meeting is one of a series of every-other-week open working meetings that alternate between time slots that are separated by 12 hours (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/5Ckc25NPr3C-wsQ9Zv4RzsADM1I/ & https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/pkUMY_NGhH3gNUbHx5Jn4sI30MY/).  There is no ideal time slot for these meetings (too many time zones are involved), so that alternation distributes the inconvenience – the next meeting on April 26 should be more convenient for Europe.

Also, the correct time for the first meeting (Tuesday, April 11 or Wednesday, April 12, depending on the time zone) is:

                     Tuesday, April 11, 2023 from 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM, (UTC-04:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

Please check carefully – there’s text elsewhere in the Webex invite that appears to contain an off-by-one-day error.

Thanks, --David

From: Michael Menth <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2023 4:08 AM
To: Black, David
Subject: Re: [Detnet] DetNet working meetings on scaling/queueing


[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

Hi David,

is this meeting public so that members of my group can also join?

Some of our background: https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.10954 [arxiv.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arxiv.org/abs/2211.10954__;!!LpKI!gmt_0aAAqMp0X4C-YrwiF-Gck9wdqxhW5Epxw4ST-uR_lqSMaC_PsRsLxgWc-ySUk5NbsoB0578ci-gmlm0n2A$>

When does the meeting take place? 8-10 pm NY time? That's 2 am in Europe?

Kind regards

Michael
Am 07.04.2023 um 23:12 schrieb Black, David:
With the first of these working meetings coming up next week (Tuesday evening or Wednesday morning depending on time zone - WebEx info here: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/5Ckc25NPr3C-wsQ9Zv4RzsADM1I/ [mailarchive.ietf.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/5Ckc25NPr3C-wsQ9Zv4RzsADM1I/__;!!LpKI!gmt_0aAAqMp0X4C-YrwiF-Gck9wdqxhW5Epxw4ST-uR_lqSMaC_PsRsLxgWc-ySUk5NbsoB0578ci-iRsxYUWA$>), I thought I’d try to describe some expectations (and non-expectations).

These open working meetings will be less structured than DetNet meetings during IETF week or the interim meeting (no fixed time slots, discussion will not be entirely organized/oriented around slide decks).  The initial open working meeting focus will be queuing and packet scheduling within individual DetNet nodes, where we’re aware of the following four drafts that propose node queuing or scheduling mechanisms:

draft-eckert-detnet-tcqf-02 Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Data Plane - Tagged Cyclic Queuing and Forwarding (TCQF)

draft-joung-detnet-asynch-detnet-framework-02 Asynchronous Deterministic Networking Framework for Large-Scale Networks

draft-peng-detnet-deadline-based-forwarding-05 Deadline Based Deterministic Forwarding

draft-peng-detnet-packet-timeslot-mechanism-01 Generic Packet Timeslot Scheduling Mechanism

If any drafts are missing from the above list (or any of the above drafts should be removed), please send a note to the list or directly to me with the WG chairs ([e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>) cc:’d.

The open working meetings will initially address three items:


  1.  Refining requirements: The scaling requirements draft (Requirements for Scaling Deterministic Networks) ought to be stable enough by the end of April that work invested in determining whether and to what extent the proposed mechanisms do/don’t meet its requirements will not be wasted.



  1.  Longer presentations of the proposed mechanisms.  Each open working meeting ought to be able to accommodate one or two 40-45 minute slots for longer, more detailed presentations than have been possible during the limited time available in WG meetings – that would be 30-35 minutes of presentation, 10-15 minutes of questions.  With apologies for the short notice, authors of proposals who would like to do this at next week’s meeting should please contact me and cc: the WG chairs.


  1.  Evaluation criteria.  It seems clear to me that we will need to look at evaluation criteria beyond the requirements draft – a process discussion of how to go about this in a reasonable and fair fashion seems appropriate (e.g., much as the effort that has gone into draft-eckert-detnet-criteria-assessment is worthy, the author has been open and honest about being a proponent of one of the solutions - I don’t like the optics of the group for one of the proposal drafts being in charge of writing the evaluation criteria for all of the proposals).

Please keep in mind that these open working meetings cannot make decisions for the WG – any suggestions/recommendations that emerge will have to be taken to this mailing list for further discussion.

Comments, questions and alternate suggestions are welcome.

Thanks, --David

David L. Black, Sr. Distinguished Engineer, Technology & Standards
Infrastructure Solutions Group, Dell Technologies
mobile [phone] [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>




_______________________________________________

detnet mailing list

[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet [ietf.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet__;!!LpKI!gmt_0aAAqMp0X4C-YrwiF-Gck9wdqxhW5Epxw4ST-uR_lqSMaC_PsRsLxgWc-ySUk5NbsoB0578ci-iZZY5l6g$>

--

Prof. Dr. habil. Michael Menth

University of Tuebingen

Faculty of Science

Department of Computer Science

Chair of Communication Networks

Sand 13, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany

phone: [phone]

fax: [phone]

mailto:[e-mail]

http://kn.inf.uni-tuebingen.de [kn.inf.uni-tuebingen.de]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/kn.inf.uni-tuebingen.de__;!!LpKI!gmt_0aAAqMp0X4C-YrwiF-Gck9wdqxhW5Epxw4ST-uR_lqSMaC_PsRsLxgWc-ySUk5NbsoB0578ci-g_Paw1IA$>