Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet-pof-03
"Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)" <gengxuesong@huawei.com> Fri, 09 September 2022 10:27 UTC
Return-Path: <gengxuesong@huawei.com>
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 85AF5C14CF0B; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 03:27:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id heYRR0bBmfUZ; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 03:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37F66C14F744; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 03:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml706-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.206]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4MPBsY4kYlz688wM; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 18:23:29 +0800 (CST)
Received: from canpemm100010.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.38) by fraeml706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2375.31; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 12:27:36 +0200
Received: from canpemm500010.china.huawei.com (7.192.105.118) by canpemm100010.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 18:27:31 +0800
Received: from canpemm500010.china.huawei.com ([7.192.105.118]) by canpemm500010.china.huawei.com ([7.192.105.118]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.024; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 18:27:31 +0800
From: "Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)" <gengxuesong@huawei.com>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>
CC: DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet-pof-03
Thread-Index: AQHYuUfIbYzzjh5RYkWzLiQ+R1aeZK3W8JoA
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2022 10:27:30 +0000
Message-ID: <1bb8d8903a1a4450bfa64e1e243ee11c@huawei.com>
References: <f363fca3-fb93-5d7c-f957-e9cef7bd9f61@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <f363fca3-fb93-5d7c-f957-e9cef7bd9f61@labn.net>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.112.41.43]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/UIupxKZdh4Wj1sSjKfW4yC-Ug98>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet-pof-03
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 09 Sep 2022 10:27:45 -0000
Hi WG, Support adoption with some comments which could be considered by the authors as follows. Best Xuesong -- section 1 " A possible implementation of PRF and PEF functions is described in [IEEE8021CB] and the related YANG model is defined in [IEEEP8021CBcv]. In general, use of per packet replication and elimination functions may result in out-of-order delivery of packets, which may not be acceptable for some deterministic applications. Correcting packet order is not a trivial task, therefore details of a Packet Ordering Function (POF) are specified herein. " [Xuesong] It may be more clear if adding some background here, for example why PRF and PEF are defined in IEEE and POF is defined in IETF. " So far in packet networks, out-of-order delivery situations were handled at higher OSI layers at the end-points/hosts (e.g., in the TCP stack when packets are sent to application layer) and not within a network in nodes acting at the Layer-2 or Layer-3 OSI layers." [Xuesong] I think packet in order is also requested in network. For example per packet load balancing will also cause packets out of order and reordering is requested. So does this mechanism also work for this scenario? Section 4.2 "Delay calculator: buffering time considers (i) the delay difference of paths used for forwarding the replicated packets and (ii) the bounded delay requirement of the given DetNet flow." [Xuesong] Why is the delay caused by reordering not considered in the delay calculator here? Section 4.3 "The basic POF algorithm delays all out-of-order packets until all previous packet arrives or a given time (POFMaxDelay) elapses." [Xuesong] Shall we consider to add the a parameter of MaxDisorderNum here? Because the buffer size is limited and the maximum number of streams that can be processed (POF node capability) will be affected by this parameter, for example: the maximum number of streams = BufferSize/(MaxDisorderNum*MaxPacketSize) Section 4.6 " The selection of the POF algorithm depends on the network scenario and the remaining delay budget of a flow." [Xuesong] Could here add some simple description about the existing normal reordering mechanism and the relationship with the algorithm described in this document, for example Sliding window? > -----Original Message----- > From: detnet [mailto:detnet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 8:30 PM > To: DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org> > Cc: DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org> > Subject: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet-pof-03 > > Hello, > > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-varga-detnet-pof/ > > Please voice your support or technical objections to adoption on the list by the > end of the day (any time zone) September 9. > > Thank you, > Lou (as Co-chair) > > _______________________________________________ > detnet mailing list > detnet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
- [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet-pof… Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Ethan Grossman
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Balázs Varga A
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Janos Farkas
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Heer, Tobias
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Fabrice Theoleyre
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll: draft-varga-detnet… Balázs Varga A