Re: [Qirg] Discrete/Continuous variable encodings

Steve Willis <swillis@swillis.org> Tue, 09 June 2020 15:41 UTC

Return-Path: <swillis@swillis.org>
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 5DCDC3A0857 for <qirg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 08:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 fLdDz6yS6cHT for <qirg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 08:41:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp105.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (smtp105.iad3a.emailsrvr.com [173.203.187.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 943EA3A0853 for <Qirg@irtf.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 08:41:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Auth-ID: swillis@swillis.org
Received: by smtp14.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: swillis-AT-swillis.org) with ESMTPSA id 413C923A1B; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender-Id: swillis@swillis.org
Received: from [192.168.1.28] (c-65-96-165-13.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [65.96.165.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:587 (trex/5.7.12); Tue, 09 Jun 2020 11:41:20 -0400
From: Steve Willis <swillis@swillis.org>
Message-Id: <7453C55C-9513-4D0B-8F2F-D69E3D6C513E@swillis.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_136B1ECF-BF0A-437E-8062-5BF4E09EFAE7"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:19 -0400
In-Reply-To: <d4b221412d3a779c162ff54519fadea5aa66fe2d.camel@tudelft.nl>
Cc: "Qirg@irtf.org" <Qirg@irtf.org>
To: Wojciech Kozlowski <W.Kozlowski@tudelft.nl>
References: <d4b221412d3a779c162ff54519fadea5aa66fe2d.camel@tudelft.nl>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
X-Classification-ID: 73ba239e-9959-49b6-9c71-e28d03d8f1df-1-1
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/qirg/Qx9j_YVeOoHIAcOqiN12QHI1Cms>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 16:33:47 -0700
Subject: Re: [Qirg] Discrete/Continuous variable encodings
X-BeenThere: qirg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Quantum Internet \(proposed\) 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: Tue, 09 Jun 2020 18:51:30 -0000

I think you have to acknowledge CV as possible alternate encoding which leads us to 

Does the current document set cover the issues for CV? 
What the issues in CV-DV repeater interoperability? 

And my solution? Address this in a future revision. 

Steve

> On Jun 9, 2020, at 11:14 AM, Wojciech Kozlowski <W.Kozlowski@tudelft.nl <mailto:W.Kozlowski@tudelft.nl>> wrote:
> 
> Dear QIRG,
> 
> One point that was raised on the call today was whether it's a goal to support
> continuous variable qubits as well as discrete variable qubits.
> 
> The consensus appeared to be that something should be included, but that it's
> quite a heavy topic on its own.
> 
> Last year, Patrick Gelard, did submit a PR for the draft in which he proposed
> that such encoding diversity be a goal so I think that's the best point to
> start a discussion from (look for lines 1111-1127): 
> https://github.com/Wojtek242/draft-irtf-qirg-principles/pull/1/files <https://github.com/Wojtek242/draft-irtf-qirg-principles/pull/1/files>
> 
> I was initially reluctant to include this section (and I haven't so far) as it
> appeared to me that it goes too deep into the physical layer. If CV vs DV can
> be kept entirely within the hardware and there is no reason to expose it beyond
> that, it might be best to keep it out of the draft. If it does somehow affect
> the protocol design landscape then I think it's a point worth mentioning.
> 
> Question to the community:
> 1. Is it worth having something about CV vs DV? Does it have an impact on the
> protocol design landscape?
> 2. If it is, does the contribution above cover the subject?
> 
> Cheers,
> Wojtek
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qirg mailing list
> Qirg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/qirg