Re: [DLNEX] [Detnet] FW: New Non-WG Mailing List: DLNEX -- Discussion of reliable and deterministic latency attributes

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Wed, 19 October 2016 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: dlnex@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dlnex@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E3612943B for <dlnex@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:59:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 8lxfyrB3sUL8 for <dlnex@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy10-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy10-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.20.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DEF52129534 for <dlnex@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 31522 invoked by uid 0); 19 Oct 2016 20:59:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw4) (10.0.90.85) by gproxy10.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 19 Oct 2016 20:59:55 -0000
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmgw4 with id xYzr1t0072SSUrH01YzuCi; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 14:59:55 -0600
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=IecUBwaa c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=CH0kA5CcgfcA:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=AUd_NHdVAAAA:8 a=9qxNCY_qAAAA:8 a=i0EeH86SAAAA:8 a=6_kXp5x7VGk6fYuAkQkA:9 a=hv_1VFgo34U6P6Pw:21 a=pe_vwDJHV1CLcc1L:21 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=9gMDlhcZUWAA:10 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22 a=TSZmLRzkpGLBZRr3r8m8:22 a=A2X48xt2e1hG9NJDz63Y:22 a=02toJ7V-nxh73JlV0Smw:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:Cc:References:To:Subject; bh=TtVCF/uY1rhoWiLGvkpEnVnwqHVEKlx8sYIBX2hdTWM=; b=LfHN+GsGZtsPKFGWZxdJDd1i1O 9dzwaI+YD0MYG65BL4XUkW9dsyxJ5hRE1n/RxGZDlGITvb7fyWA6bvwbNq/OPWdzYD9gq7bFpObJj EMfnRVTHk3FWi5jnj3DszVeqp;
Received: from pool-100-15-85-191.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.85.191]:52812 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86_1) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1bwxxm-00077Z-UF; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 14:59:51 -0600
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, "Patrick Wetterwald (pwetterw)" <pwetterw@cisco.com>
References: <E4FAC118-EC7C-4BD8-8A3C-8A7824F6BDD9@cisco.com> <CAG4d1rc-DNeNB8E7Y9m+=yraYTfpvWV1YJ8Q6TfvkWiGZdts1A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <d2c12e06-3149-56e6-4ca8-806a1eeddc63@labn.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:59:48 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rc-DNeNB8E7Y9m+=yraYTfpvWV1YJ8Q6TfvkWiGZdts1A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.85.191
X-Exim-ID: 1bwxxm-00077Z-UF
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-85-191.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.85.191]:52812
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 11
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dlnex/5ZQM0AmEW4rkIxCp3-lfaljXV2g>
Cc: "matthew.bocci@nokia.com" <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>, "Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, "detnet@ietf.org" <detnet@ietf.org>, "dlnex@ietf.org" <dlnex@ietf.org>, "linda.dunbar@huawei.com" <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [DLNEX] [Detnet] FW: New Non-WG Mailing List: DLNEX -- Discussion of reliable and deterministic latency attributes
X-BeenThere: dlnex@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Discussion of reliable and deterministic latency attributes <dlnex@ietf.org>
List-Id: Discussion of reliable and deterministic latency attributes <dlnex.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dlnex>, <mailto:dlnex-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dlnex/>
List-Post: <mailto:dlnex@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dlnex-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dlnex>, <mailto:dlnex-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 20:59:59 -0000

Hi Alia,

    Overlap looks likely.  I hope that when it does occur, you send
folks over here to contribute -- additional input / WG participation
would be great!  (For folks not familiar with DetNet, check out our
charter at https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/detnet/charter/)

I expect we'll have some good data plane centric discussions at this
meeting, for those who may be interested (there's even still time to
submit related drafts!)

Cheers,

Lou

DetNet Co-chair

On 10/19/2016 11:46 AM, Alia Atlas wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> The discussion intended on dlnex, a non-WG mailing list, is, I think,
> broader - spanning the range of communications between upper layer
> applications and the network.  It is not clear yet what work might
> develop.  Be sure that I will be watching for any specific overlap
> with DetNet.
>
> I feel that it is useful to make it easy for groups to have a list to
> brainstorm about their ideas before work is mature enough to consider
> for standardization.
>
> Regards,
> Alia
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Patrick Wetterwald (pwetterw)
> <pwetterw@cisco.com <mailto:pwetterw@cisco.com>> wrote:
>
>     Can someone explain me why this mailing list is created outside of
>     DetNet?
>
>     This sounds like a subset of Detnet no?
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     Patrick
>
>
>     On 19/10/2016, 07:56, "detnet on behalf of Pascal Thubert
>     (pthubert)" <detnet-bounces@ietf.org
>     <mailto:detnet-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of pthubert@cisco.com
>     <mailto:pthubert@cisco.com>> wrote:
>
>         From: IETF-Announce [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org
>     <mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of IETF Secretariat
>         Sent: mardi 18 octobre 2016 22:36
>         To: IETF Announcement List <ietf-announce@ietf.org
>     <mailto:ietf-announce@ietf.org>>
>         Cc: matthew.bocci@nokia.com <mailto:matthew.bocci@nokia.com>;
>     dlnex@ietf.org <mailto:dlnex@ietf.org>; linda.dunbar@huawei.com
>     <mailto:linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
>         Subject: New Non-WG Mailing List: DLNEX -- Discussion of
>     reliable and deterministic latency attributes
>
>
>         A new IETF non-working group email list has been created.
>
>         List address:dlnex@ietf.org <mailto:address%3Adlnex@ietf.org>
>         Archive:
>     https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=dlnex
>     <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=dlnex>
>         To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dlnex
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dlnex>
>
>         Purpose:
>         DLNEX is to discuss various latency characteristics that can
>     be exposed by network elements or segments and to explore if there
>     are any latency related attributes that can be utilized by upper
>     layer. For example, could there be latency exposure that upper
>     layer can utilize to plan how to distribute their content to the
>     right edges to achieve optimal user experience? Or something used
>     by Interactive AR controller to optimize their services? Is there
>     any value gained by upper layer expressing that they would rather
>     have fixed latency than losing packets?
>
>         The discussion is to answer questions like: are there any
>     effective interaction/coordination between upper layer and lower
>     layer to achieve more efficient optimization for latency sensitive
>     services?
>
>         This discussion group is also a place to showcase the state of
>     the arts in latency optimized switching architecture and interface
>     designs, as the feasibility exercise for achieving reliable and
>     deterministic latency through a network element or a segment.
>     Those latency exposures are the foundation for (future) latency
>     optimized control plane.
>
>
>         For additional information, please contact the list
>     administrators.
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         detnet mailing list
>         detnet@ietf.org <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     detnet mailing list
>     detnet@ietf.org <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> detnet mailing list
> detnet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet