Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments
"qiangli (D)" <qiangli3@huawei.com> Thu, 27 June 2019 08:47 UTC
Return-Path: <qiangli3@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 C3B011200CD for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 01:47:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U0JaMXaixGOc for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 01:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CA8612000F for <detnet@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 01:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml709-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id CA0C1C684568DDD65EC9; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:47:41 +0100 (IST)
Received: from dggeme751-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.97) by lhreml709-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:47:41 +0100
Received: from dggeme752-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.98) by dggeme751-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.97) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1591.10; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:47:39 +0800
Received: from dggeme752-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.6.80.76]) by dggeme752-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.6.80.76]) with mapi id 15.01.1591.008; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:47:38 +0800
From: "qiangli (D)" <qiangli3@huawei.com>
To: Shunsuke Homma <shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp>, "detnet@ietf.org" <detnet@ietf.org>
CC: "peter.j.willis@bt.com" <peter.j.willis@bt.com>, 'Liang GENG' <liang.geng@hotmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments
Thread-Index: AQHVIAiMvlIW7RTI2kKwIvaJSqO8BaafgoUwgA3IwAD//9AhAIACH2xg
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 08:47:38 +0000
Message-ID: <92dc836a882543cfb4c79b25fc5124f8@huawei.com>
References: <BN6PR22MB0771D878C59904BC7E0E0ACC87ED0@BN6PR22MB0771.namprd22.prod.outlook.com> <8aea82da521a4faead2f6cb4652f7d4b@huawei.com> <cd7bbcc689ad4d1e80bb034fab603f65@huawei.com> <005b01d52bf0$ca9e6020$5fdb2060$@hco.ntt.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <005b01d52bf0$ca9e6020$5fdb2060$@hco.ntt.co.jp>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.130.163.138]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_92dc836a882543cfb4c79b25fc5124f8huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/li_QNcGYEuCyQgMy-f3J42BGfiU>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 08:47:47 -0000
Hi Shunsuke, Thanks for your support. "Scalability" is indeed an important requirement, especially for operators when considering actual deployment. DetNet has considered this point, the DetNet architecture proposed to improve scalability through flow aggregation. Except for scale to a great amount of traffic flows, current Req. 7 also mentions the number of network devices. Do you recommend splitting Req.7 from these two aspects? Best regards, Cristina QIANG From: Shunsuke Homma [mailto:shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp] Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 3:29 PM To: qiangli (D) <qiangli3@huawei.com>; detnet@ietf.org Cc: peter.j.willis@bt.com; 'Liang GENG' <liang.geng@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments Hi, I agree that these requirements are important, especially from operator's aspect. Services and applications which are latency sensitive will increase more, and it would be required that enough dynamicity and scalability for utilizing it in carrier-wide networks. Regarding req 7, "scalable" has wide meaning, for example implementation or management aspects, and I hope it is broken down to more concrete requirements in the next revision. Best regards, Shunsuke From: detnet [mailto:detnet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of qiangli (D) Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 12:33 PM To: detnet@ietf.org<mailto:detnet@ietf.org> Cc: shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp<mailto:shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp>; peter.j.willis@bt.com<mailto:peter.j.willis@bt.com>; Liang GENG Subject: Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments Hi all, The Req. 2.2 discusses that DetNet should be able to tolerate a certain degree of clock jitter & wander even within a time synchronous domain. We would like to know if you agree or disagree with this requirement. If you think this requirement is necessary, then to what degree of clock jitter & wander do you expect? BTW, we are going to ask for WG adoption for this document in IETF 105 meeting. That's will be greatly appreciated if you can share your comments to help us further improve this draft. Best regards, Cristina QIANG From: detnet [mailto:detnet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of qiangli (D) Sent: Monday, June 17, 2019 4:11 PM To: detnet@ietf.org<mailto:detnet@ietf.org> Cc: shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp<mailto:shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp>; peter.j.willis@bt.com<mailto:peter.j.willis@bt.com>; Liang GENG <liang.geng@hotmail.com<mailto:liang.geng@hotmail.com>> Subject: Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments Hi all, This version has collected 7 requirements, and divided these requirements into optional (SHOULD) and mandatory (MUST) two types as following shows. We authors would like to know if this requirement list is complete, and if the classification is appropriate or not. Your review and comments are highly appropriated. ========================== Req. 1: Must support the dynamic creation, modification and deletion of deterministic services Req. 2.1: Should support asynchronous clocks across domains Req. 2.2 : Should tolerate a certain of clock jitter & wander within a clock synchronous domain Req. 3: Must support Inter-Continental propagation delay Req. 4: Should have self-monitoring capability Req. 5: Should be robust against denial of service attacks Req. 6: Must tolerate failures of links or nodes and topology changes Req. 7: Must be scalable =========================== Best regards, Cristina QIANG From: Liang GENG [mailto:liang.geng@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 11:53 AM To: detnet@ietf.org<mailto:detnet@ietf.org> Cc: Black, David <David.Black@dell.com<mailto:David.Black@dell.com>>; peter..j.willis@bt.com<mailto:peter.j.willis@bt.com>; shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp<mailto:shunsuke.homma.fp@hco.ntt.co.jp>; qiangli (D) <qiangli3@huawei.com<mailto:qiangli3@huawei.com>> Subject: draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 revised for comments Dear all, Since IETF 104, we have carefully revised draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency-02 according to received comments. The latest 02 version was uploaded and available online https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-latency/. This new version collects more technical, operational and management requirements of deploying deterministic latency service on layer 3 networks from the perspective of various service providers. Comments are welcome! Best regards, Liang Geng on behavior of co-authors
- [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bounded-l… Liang GENG
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… Shunsuke Homma
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… Janos Farkas
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… Janos Farkas
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… peter.j.willis
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… Shunsuke Homma
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… peter.j.willis
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [Detnet] draft-geng-detnet-requirements-bound… qiangli (D)