Re: [Detnet] Transport sub-layer name change (Was Re: Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-08)

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Lou, et.al,.

On 2018-12-08 00:13, Lou Berger wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Focusing on the proposal:
> 
>> In order to have another alternative on the table I propose renaming
>> "DetNet Transport sub-layer" to "DetNet Forwarding sub-layer"
> This is a bit of a new usage for 'Forwarding' but not totally -- 
> thinking about FIBs.  My main reservation is that forwarding is usually 
> considered separately from queuing, while this sub-layer embodies both. 
> I do accept that TE usually considers both forwarding/steering and 
> queuing, and that some assume that sophisticated queuing is required for 
> TE -- which is actually service dependent.
> 
> Even with this caveat and my personal preference for the 'TE' option, I 
> (as contributor) can live with "DetNet Forwarding sub-layer".

Understanding that we want to pick good names, and that sometimes this
turns out to be "impossible".

But after all a name is just a name.

I can live with "DetNet Forwarding sub-layer".

/Loa

> 
> Lou
> 
> On 12/7/2018 10:45 AM, János Farkas wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a similar concern with the change. It of course depends on the
>> definition of Traffic Engineering, but the term "DetNet TE sub-layer"
>> may imply to the reader that Traffic Engineering is a must even for
>> DetNet transit nodes. As far as I recall, the intention is to make
>> possible that DetNet transit nodes can be kept simple. Depending on the
>> actual DetNet service provided, DetNet transit nodes can be actually 
>> simple.
>>
>> The idea behind the introduction of the two DetNet sub-layers was to
>> make it easier to tackle the problem. The lower layer provides simpler
>> packet forwarding related functions, the higher DetNet Service sub-layer
>> provides more complex DetNet service related functions.
>>
>> In order to have another alternative on the table I propose renaming
>> "DetNet Transport sub-layer" to "DetNet Forwarding sub-layer"
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Janos
>>
>>
>> On 11/20/2018 10:10 PM, Lou Berger wrote:
>>> On 11/20/2018 3:11 PM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
>>>> This terminology is certainly appropriate for TEAS. For DetNet, this
>>>> seems to make the assertion that the DetNet underlay is always
>>>> traffic-engineered, even if IPv4 or IPv6 (which is certainly possible
>>>> using TE extensions for the IGPs).
>>> This is certainly a fair point and one that does lead me to have a
>>> slight reservation about the change, that said, it seems the benefit
>>> out ways the downsides.
>>>
>>>> As long as people are OK with this assertion, then I'm OK with it as
>>>> well. That should be made clear in the architecture spec where the
>>>> term "DetNet TE sub-layer" is introduced/defined.
>>> agreed.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Andy
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 1:29 PM Grossman, Ethan A. <[e-mail]
>>>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      I like it.
>>>>      Ethan.
>>>>
>>>>      -----Original Message-----
>>>>      From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[e-mail]
>>>>      <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>>      Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 10:27 AM
>>>>      To: Lou Berger <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>;
>>>>      Scharf, Michael <[e-mail]
>>>>      <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>>      Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>;
>>>>      [e-mail]
>>>>      <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>>      Subject: RE: Transport sub-layer name change (Was Re: [Detnet]
>>>>      Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-08)
>>>>
>>>>      I support this change;
>>>>
>>>>      Pascal
>>>>
>>>>      > -----Original Message-----
>>>>      > From: Lou Berger <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>>      > Sent: mardi 20 novembre 2018 19:19
>>>>      > To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[e-mail]
>>>>      <mailto:[e-mail]>>; Scharf, Michael
>>>>      > <[e-mail]
>>>>      <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>>      > Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>;
>>>>      [e-mail]
>>>>      <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>>      > Subject: Transport sub-layer name change (Was Re: [Detnet]
>>>>      Tsvart last
>>>>      > call review of draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-08)
>>>>      >
>>>>      > ALL,
>>>>      >
>>>>      > There is a desire to replace the word "Transport" from the 
>>>> DetNet
>>>>      > Transport sub-layer to avoid confusion with L$ Transport
>>>> protocols.
>>>>      >
>>>>      > In the TEAS WG we had a similar discussion and we replaced
>>>>      "Transport"
>>>>      > with "Traffic Engineered (TE) ".
>>>>      >
>>>>      > While a bit more verbose, what do people think about this 
>>>> change?
>>>>      >
>>>>      > To be clear, the suggestion is:
>>>>      >
>>>>      > OLD
>>>>      >
>>>>      >                     .
>>>>      >                     .
>>>>      >       +----------------------------+
>>>>      >       |  DetNet Service sub-layer  | PW, UDP, GRE
>>>>      >       +----------------------------+
>>>>      >       | DetNet Transport sub-layer | IPv6, IPv4, MPLS TE LSPs,
>>>>      MPLS SR
>>>>      >       +----------------------------+
>>>>      >                     .
>>>>      >                     .
>>>>      >
>>>>      >                   Figure 4: DetNet adaptation to data plane
>>>>      >
>>>>      > NEW
>>>>      >
>>>>      >                     .
>>>>      >                     .
>>>>      >       +----------------------------+
>>>>      >       |  DetNet Service sub-layer  | PW, UDP, GRE
>>>>      >       +----------------------------+
>>>>      >       |      DetNet TE sub-layer   | IPv6, IPv4, MPLS TE LSPs,
>>>>      MPLS SR
>>>>      >       +----------------------------+
>>>>      >                     .
>>>>      >                     .
>>>>      >
>>>>      >                   Figure 4: DetNet adaptation to data plane
>>>>      >
>>>>      > Lou
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> detnet mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> detnet mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
Senior MPLS Expert
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: [phone]