Re: [manet-dlep-rg] Latency

"Taylor, Rick" <Rick.Taylor@cassidian.com> Tue, 12 November 2013 13:17 UTC

Return-Path: <rick.taylor@cassidian.com>
X-Original-To: manet-dlep-rg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet-dlep-rg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C12EE11E8162 for <manet-dlep-rg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 05:17:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.539
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jR-wj5COoOoz for <manet-dlep-rg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 05:17:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-dotnet3.eads.net (mail-dotnet3.eads.net [193.56.40.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCD2311E8164 for <manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 05:17:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from unknown (HELO fr-gate2.mailhub.intra.corp) ([53.154.16.34]) by mail-dotnet3.eads.net with ESMTP; 12 Nov 2013 14:17:16 +0100
Received: from f8561vs5.main.fr.ds.corp ([10.37.8.21]) by fr-gate2.mailhub.intra.corp with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.7381); Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:16:36 +0100
Received: from f8561vs4.main.fr.ds.corp ([10.37.8.27]) by f8561vs5.main.fr.ds.corp with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:16:36 +0100
Received: from SUCNPTEXC01.com.ad.uk.ds.corp ([10.80.73.70]) by f8561vs4.main.fr.ds.corp with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:16:35 +0100
Received: from SUCNPTEXM01.COM.AD.UK.DS.CORP ([fe80::2543:10a0:fd02:b894]) by SUCNPTEXC01.com.ad.uk.ds.corp ([::1]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 13:16:35 +0000
From: "Taylor, Rick" <Rick.Taylor@cassidian.com>
To: Teco Boot <teco@inf-net.nl>, Stan Ratliff <sratliff@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [manet-dlep-rg] Latency
Thread-Index: AQHO3vlaXYfOk1EbKU2oVOZb7avOP5ohlDeQ
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 13:16:35 +0000
Message-ID: <B177F831FB91F242972D0C35F6A0733106FB04B0@SUCNPTEXM01.com.ad.uk.ds.corp>
References: <72FB622921C13746AD6349E70A8D9F307D9192F7@EXC-MBX03.tsn.tno.nl> <CAK=bVC85XAXR3Zkwq+JwELF-dvgrKwbowWCvwvnjeVn7VStnbw@mail.gmail.com> <72FB622921C13746AD6349E70A8D9F307D9193CD@EXC-MBX03.tsn.tno.nl> <5A8A5085482DA84995F4E70F5093AB50268E6C@XCH-BLV-503.nw.nos.boeing.com> <B2BA430A-F4E6-4DED-A7BB-7282A22802B7@inf-net.nl> <D02397F1-9D1B-4B36-81D0-4585ACDBA34A@gmail.com> <5D184300-2D97-4EC1-8D91-76D4A79B2BDA@inf-net.nl> <DDAE98C5-520E-4F8F-9F9B-2AB9A15A70EF@cisco.com> <428b0bc0-9a46-4c64-ab2b-641a993531e3@SUCNPTEXC01.COM.AD.UK.DS.CORP>
In-Reply-To: <428b0bc0-9a46-4c64-ab2b-641a993531e3@SUCNPTEXC01.COM.AD.UK.DS.CORP>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.80.23.75]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Nov 2013 13:16:35.0948 (UTC) FILETIME=[69E622C0:01CEDFA9]
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-8.0.0.4194-6.500.1024-20284.007
X-TM-AS-Result: No--35.517700-0.000000-31
X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes
X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No
Cc: "DLEP Research Group (manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org)" <manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [manet-dlep-rg] Latency
X-BeenThere: manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DLEP Radio Group <manet-dlep-rg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet-dlep-rg>, <mailto:manet-dlep-rg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet-dlep-rg>
List-Post: <mailto:manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-dlep-rg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dlep-rg>, <mailto:manet-dlep-rg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 13:17:34 -0000

I'm not sure if I was particularly clear in my opinion about Latency.

I would like to see a single 'good' latency/time metric mandatory in DLEP.

I appreciate the work Henning has already done in this area, and suggest to the DT that he selects a sensible definition of the Latency TLV (if he is willing!) and I'm sure we can all have a good argument about it afterwards ;)

Cheers,

Rick Taylor

> -----Original Message-----
> From: manet-dlep-rg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-dlep-rg-
> bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Teco Boot
> Sent: 11 November 2013 16:15
> To: Stan Ratliff
> Cc: DLEP Research Group (manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org)
> Subject: [manet-dlep-rg] Latency
>
>
> Op 11 nov. 2013, om 01:55 heeft Stan Ratliff (sratliff)
> <sratliff@cisco.com> het volgende geschreven:
>
> > Point 11 - I didn't hear that. Really, I didn't hear any conclusions
> about Latency. Other opinions?
>
> We discussed it and all speakers said it is an important metric, so it
> will be an optional TLV in core document.
>
> Wasn't Henning tasked with verifying Latency and EFT?
>
> Teco
>
> _______________________________________________
> manet-dlep-rg mailing list
> manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dlep-rg
The information contained within this e-mail and any files attached to this e-mail is private and in addition may include commercially sensitive information. The contents of this e-mail are for the intended recipient only and therefore if you wish to disclose the information contained within this e-mail or attached files, please contact the sender prior to any such disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying or distribution is prohibited. Please also contact the sender and inform them of the error and delete the e-mail, including any attached files from your system. Cassidian Limited, Registered Office : Quadrant House, Celtic Springs, Coedkernew, Newport, NP10 8FZ Company No: 04191036 http://www.cassidian.com