[Detnet] detnet interim: proposed slides for draft-eckert-detnet-criteria-assessment-00
Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Tue, 07 March 2023 04:25 UTC
Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 78F4DC14CF1F; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 20:25:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.949
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 Auwc4oflo1DG; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 20:25:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 762C9C14CF1E; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 20:25:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4PW2S85CV1znkdj; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 05:25:44 +0100 (CET)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 4PW2S84VHGzkvFR; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 05:25:44 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 05:25:44 +0100
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: detnet@ietf.org, detnet-chairs@ietf.org
Message-ID: <ZAa8yDtLDwEuqTha@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/X4oisGWbz05gQ1ypp1P6ND6ujDE>
Subject: [Detnet] detnet interim: proposed slides for draft-eckert-detnet-criteria-assessment-00
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: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 04:25:59 -0000
Sigh. I hate when i am doing work last-minute, but i did promise this to the WG and
i did not get to it earlier.
I just posted a new subject draft and proposed 5 slides that give an overview for this
draft on tomorrows interim datatracker page.
This is meant to propose how to start capturing and quantify comparison of common criteria
for the methods we want to evaluate, but (IMHO) equally applicable to existing methods).
Hope this is useful. Of course it is but a rough start, but should at least show
the range of criteria we may need to care about in comparison.
Cheers
Toerless
- [Detnet] detnet interim: proposed slides for draf… Toerless Eckert