[Qirg] Comments about stages in draft-irtf-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases

Wojciech Kozlowski <W.Kozlowski@tudelft.nl> Fri, 26 March 2021 15:32 UTC

Return-Path: <W.Kozlowski@tudelft.nl>
X-Original-To: qirg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: qirg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB9433A2149 for <qirg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 08:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 fgy-KINxFXSQ for <qirg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 08:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailservice.tudelft.nl (mailservice.tudelft.nl [130.161.131.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB8953A2146 for <qirg@irtf.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 08:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by amavis (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714F7400B2 for <qirg@irtf.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:32:42 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at tudelft.nl
Received: from mailservice.tudelft.nl ([130.161.131.69]) by localhost (tudelft.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id eCcCaEfTteOc for <qirg@irtf.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:32:41 +0100 (CET)
Received: from srv218.tudelft.net (mailboxcluster.tudelft.net [131.180.6.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.tudelft.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E4154009E for <qirg@irtf.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:32:41 +0100 (CET)
Received: from SRV217.tudelft.net (131.180.6.17) by srv218.tudelft.net (131.180.6.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2242.4; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:32:40 +0100
Received: from SRV217.tudelft.net ([fe80::1f9:fdaf:2ae6:2ebe]) by SRV217.tudelft.net ([fe80::1f9:fdaf:2ae6:2ebe%2]) with mapi id 15.01.2242.004; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:32:40 +0100
From: Wojciech Kozlowski <W.Kozlowski@tudelft.nl>
To: "qirg@irtf.org" <qirg@irtf.org>
Thread-Topic: Comments about stages in draft-irtf-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases
Thread-Index: AdciUzvNryOIrj6QSrKgZHTSDWFtiQ==
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 15:32:40 +0000
Message-ID: <b209cf81a6a64c4e8df88306baa4065a@tudelft.nl>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_b209cf81a6a64c4e8df88306baa4065atudelftnl_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/qirg/PO7EdyAzE7JJsuZeUGgwZ79wldM>
Subject: [Qirg] Comments about stages in draft-irtf-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases
X-BeenThere: qirg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Quantum Internet RG <qirg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/qirg>, <mailto:qirg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/qirg/>
List-Post: <mailto:qirg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qirg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/qirg>, <mailto:qirg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 15:32:48 -0000

Hi QIRG,

At the IETF meeting on 10 March, I raised some concerns about how the stages were expressed in this draft. I have read through carefully now and discussed it with some people and I have the following comments:

The network stages are defined based on application capabilities and NOT based on distance. Therefore, when summarising the network stages from the paper, the draft should not be mentioning distances. Currently there's a lot of focus put on distance. This means that stage-1: "trusted repeater stage" means basically QKD-only. Stage-2: "prepare-and-measure" means we can do QKD *and* other applications that only require prepare-and-measure functionality. Note that there is no statement about achievable distances - only about the end-node capabilities. Stage-3 allows end-to-end entanglement creation and so on.

Therefore, my practical feedback to the I-D authors is to forget about distances and rephrase in terms of application capabilities.

However, this raises an interesting point that perhaps the QIRG/I-D authors may want to consider is whether one may want to put some further thought as how distance capabilities affect the use cases as that is not covered by these aforementioned stages. I think it would be valuable if the community has any thoughts on this point.

Best,
Wojtek