Re: [mpls] [Detnet] Help wanted in detnet

"Adrian Farrel" <> Sun, 22 January 2017 22:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0F57129A4C; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:23:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.619
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.619 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id inqCLQmokoQA; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:23:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCA0D129A49; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:23:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (localhost.localdomain []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v0MMNVrm032029; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:23:31 GMT
Received: from 950129200 ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v0MMNPmP031958 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:23:28 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <>
To: "'John Dowdell'" <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:23:27 -0000
Message-ID: <0a6d01d274fe$2a87e530$7f97af90$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A6E_01D274FE.2AA0EB70"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQH2aMLSnUr04bXpaCJBKv8lx+37yqD9Jlvg
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-
X-TM-AS-Result: No--13.118-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--13.118-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: yebcs53SkkCI0KPyMNrNUsrT39PoDNtWA3qzfR5DdMsXpkLLKLYrrNeu l29/x8ODB0OmVprnj8hSi2EweEhJsqzu4G+93oCZBEfU2vugRF382p2ebJNgc4eUNQK7Qj5cfJJ VqcZJmJLUn56zTDwAWAxHHMavlU4vn/m18ngarmvFlCgYxEaGExPlTZcBPlZFsp5O052MzLqBuL DzzkmS124btYJYPAJCdCcWUewSWKRPxIXOhlk+6eYAh37ZsBDCj0hFbSgsWhy1eX0jEQ9c6kghF UT1Eid0XRrFMKR5EDvlct82O1W2f6SbvL5QzJ6If598+KnsMOgBZBplMxI/ziDbJV2PcsBEXRAp ulKqWOoEpJEgN5m6+Y40IvbU6GdukU34HyglnlpCvapcIkxJX5rOgZfh4P32ExpsOtmUB6nv/72 zC4hJFVhUDZOPhwqIRHaihp8THGAxoJNALx/f4Z3bt4XlQMWjD+LwVja9M4EgOnjvjQ5gMSWdw9 Myj4ex9dMkDbqNTiWX7nDC+4gKenNQXkvyemjfXTK4OtPUfQSjuF41aTJRXZ/paSZmLhGje5bas ibx4KfyTo1GsSlyqhkigyII1PZ5MuPfXQm0MvCKC6Im4I1RF9Vj2MQh1a6nYB83633RxLeHNAeT lC/7tTOaljH5QqOHcLYrJin8fu9ZiostRfaYC7iMC5wdwKqddwX/SSKrKHgPGMG6AkHPPAhO7Hq RFugr823ldlTfC4t2QRPOro/h7RSF8L+KnNGTpYQ/SMviFcMiBAf19LYIBpU4cC9nAOhdUdfEKc 10rU44RDGbByRvWxESBRJlSEUWU6L1rmVqlpGeAiCmPx4NwGmRqNBHmBvevqq8s2MNhPB9j2Gwz TE3vbyah9aCYUCH2Tw9Cyyby+fmOV/uBZVGEJIHHtYJMPxIMEf6ARcPGffRED8cypuD19Sf6T5d 5Njlab2+6QNHA7rJc0galx9ch/CAvm9iRH53
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [Detnet] Help wanted in detnet
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:23:37 -0000

Hey John,
I realise that your email was two months ago, but I don't see any responses in
the archive and so I thought I would try to understand why by re-reading your
I think it is very probably completely unclear to everyone who is not following
Detnet exactly what you're asking for.
Reading your email (and none of the Detnet documents) I am not clear whether you
plan to transport deterministic Ethernet over some as yet unspecified data plane
(which you might choose or enhance based on its capabilities), whether you
propose to map the features of the transported deterministic Ethernet to
features of the transport, whether you hope to map the features of the
deterministic Ethernet to features of the transport so that only the data is
actually transported, or what. You could, for example, use a transport that has
no scheduling and queueing support, but that is also non-blocking.
Indeed, the word "transport" probably immediately made half of your audience
think one thing (transport network) and the other half another thing (transport
layer protocol).
Of course, I went the extra mile ;-) and looked at your slide. Sadly no light
was shed.
I suspect the answer you're looking for is not "why not use deterministic
Ethernet as your transport?" and similarly "have you thought of using a photonic
Can you better phrase your question for the audience?
From: detnet [] On Behalf Of John Dowdell
Sent: 15 November 2016 05:32
Subject: [Detnet] Help wanted in detnet
Hi all in mpls and teas groups (consolidating earlier posting only on mpls)
Over in detnet wg we are working on transporting deterministic Ethernet (e.g.
from 802.1TSN LANs) across the wide area for applications such as industrial
control and audio/video broadcast. One of the key assumptions is that the
underlying transport already has sufficient scheduling and queueing support to
allow proper extension of time-sensitive (or even time-critical) traffic over,
for example, MPLS.
To help us validate that assumption, please can someone volunteer to help us?
Feel free to come over to the detnet list. Recommendations on exactly which
flavour(s) of MPLS and/or configurations and/or gotchas would be most welcome.
The slides in question are here
.pptx, slide 4.
Many thanks in anticipation.