Re: [Qirg] Question on the Network Model for Quantum Networks

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 2:32 PM Wojciech Kozlowski <w.kozlowski@tudelft.nl>
wrote:

> On 27/03/2019 14:08, Stephen Botzko wrote:
>
> This whole area is new to me, so it's quite likely my question has already
> been thought about.
>
> My understanding is that the goal of quantum networking is to create (and
> possibly manage) entangled qubits.  Each entangled qubit is an object that
> exists in precisely two locations at any point in time, and has other
> properties (in particular fidelity).
>
> The goal of quantum networking is to create, distribute, and manage *Bell
> Pairs* which consist of two qubits split across two locations. It's not one
> qubit in two places.
>
> [SB]Thanks for the correction.  A Bell Pair is the object, not an
entangled qubit.

> I am wondering why we are trying to map classical networking concepts like
> "quantum connections" and packet store+forward onto this problem domain.
> Has anyone looked at using a different framework (for instance content
> defined networking)?  It might be a more natural starting point.
>
> The reason for starting with the standard framework is that it is well
> understood, there is a wealth of available literature on the topic, and
> also there are many experts who understand the subject. A lot of people
> have also noticed similarities between certain classical protocols like
> RSVP and the problem of distributing Bell Pairs so it seems natural to
> pursue this direction.
>

> [SB] There are some similarities, since RSVP does require each router on a
> path to commit to provide a precious resource (bandwidth).  But the
> bandwidth reservation in RSVP has some persistence - by contrast, the each
> Quantum Repeater on a path is committing to perform a discrete
> transaction.    And RSVP isn't fundamental to classical networking (and
> AFAIK was never widely deployed).
>

> However, I wouldn't say that this is the only way to go or that some other
> framework might not be more optimal. In fact, Rod, one of the group's
> chair, has for example proposed to use a recursive architecture (
> https://www.nii.ac.jp/pi/n8/8_65.pdf). I haven't heard anyone suggest
> content defined networking for quantum yet, but if one were to come up I'm
> sure the group would also be interested in such a proposal.
>
> Also, I am thinking that it might be useful to construct a data model that
> shows how entangled qubits are created, moved, destroyed, etc. This could
> also show any physics constraints (for instance, cases where bits need to
> be transported on the quantum link). The tutorial shows some of this, but I
> think it is incomplete.
>
> That is a good point, and might be worth adding to the "architectural
> principles" work which will be going on in the near future.
>
[SB] Ideally that model would be a driver of the overall network
architecture.

>
> Stephen
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qirg mailing listQirg@irtf.orghttps://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/qirg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qirg mailing list
> Qirg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/qirg
>