Re: [Detnet] DetNet question from the MPLS 118 use case slides Wed, 08 November 2023 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A336FC169506; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 07:54:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T8OvNVLqgtsY; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 07:54:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC702C15C2A0; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 07:54:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4SQV4j5Krxz8XrRF; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 23:53:57 +0800 (CST)
Received: from ([]) by with SMTP id 3A8Frrvv017033; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 23:53:54 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from
Received: from mapi (njy2app02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid203; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 23:53:58 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 23:53:58 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa654baf16ffffffffad2-3cae1
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: 3A8Frrvv017033
X-Fangmail-Gw-Spam-Type: 0
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 654BAF15.000/4SQV4j5Krxz8XrRF
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] DetNet question from the MPLS 118 use case slides
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 15:54:10 -0000

Hi Jonas,
I would like to bring your notice that we have a draft that provides the MPLS MNA encapsulation for enhanced DetNet, which will be discussed at MPLS session tommorow. Please refer to the below links for details:
This MNA format proposed in this draft follows MPLS MNA requirement and MNA header drafts
The MPLS DetNet data carried in MNA option is consistent with the enhanced DetNet data plane requirements specified at
We will keep follow the latest discussions on the enhanced DetNet data plane at DetNet WG and follow the MPLS MNA format specifed at MPLS WG.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Xueyan (on behalf of co-authors)


From: <>
To: mpls <>;
Cc: detnet <>;
Date: 2023/11/08 00:51
Subject: [Detnet] DetNet question from the MPLS 118 use case slides

detnet mailing list


Flipping through “04. Use Cases for MPLS Network Action Indicators and MPLS Ancillary Data” noticed the question about Use Case 4 on slide 6.
Although, there may be individuals interested in it, the DetNet WG has no consensus on any requirements on this topic.
Of course, the DetNet WG is interested in ensuring that this work does not negatively impact the DetNet MPLS data plane.
Janos and Lou