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

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Fri, 21 October 2016 16:13 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: dlnex@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dlnex@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D07D1297C3 for <dlnex@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:13:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.501
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.501 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] 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 ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6b7-W4fJdFmB for <dlnex@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:13:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy6-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy6-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3FE621297BF for <dlnex@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:13:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 22177 invoked by uid 0); 21 Oct 2016 16:13:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw4) ( by gproxy6.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 21 Oct 2016 16:13:37 -0000
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([]) by cmgw4 with id yGDP1t00y2SSUrH01GDSRw; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:13:27 -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=MTxdROqgHMdUcdUUt8wA:9 a=gDqJJm8gv-GPXUEK:21 a=wwOLm4hedoBoDbkZ: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:References:To:Subject; bh=oA9J4t6CSNcGjSm9mb9zGo/GfXueJij72TmLEVzdRgU=; b=ceJ+iCwAyAiSZzlUdtxc3tDCnE MepYYo37KF458JcQkITTw8CXo7eqQ4vJreer567jiTCZVFVq6f2vdK88mK6KnZU94xsXCrj0G87Jo lwQiO9EIJvlapKgIPkI0wpSmd;
Received: from pool-100-15-85-191.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([]:43166 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 1bxcRf-0004cB-R5; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:13:23 -0600
To: "Patrick Wetterwald (pwetterw)" <pwetterw@cisco.com>, "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, "detnet@ietf.org" <detnet@ietf.org>, "matthew.bocci@nokia.com" <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>, "dlnex@ietf.org" <dlnex@ietf.org>, "linda.dunbar@huawei.com" <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
References: <E4FAC118-EC7C-4BD8-8A3C-8A7824F6BDD9@cisco.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <55059a4b-4694-a423-5abd-7848a85518f8@labn.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 12:13:19 -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: <E4FAC118-EC7C-4BD8-8A3C-8A7824F6BDD9@cisco.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-Exim-ID: 1bxcRf-0004cB-R5
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-85-191.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) []:43166
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 5
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dlnex/DC8spTnsU3QywMt3wPVrdMY3isE>
Subject: [DLNEX] Use cases (was: Re: [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: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:13:44 -0000

It would be good to hear from the DLNEX folks on if there are
applications use cases that we missed or don't cover, see

This may help determine the relationship of DLNEX is overlapping or not...


On 10/19/2016 8:17 AM, Patrick Wetterwald (pwetterw) 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 on behalf of pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:
>     From: IETF-Announce [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>
>     Cc: matthew.bocci@nokia.com; dlnex@ietf.org; 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
>     Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=dlnex
>     To subscribe: 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
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
> _______________________________________________
> detnet mailing list
> detnet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet