Re: [Raw] Some comments on draft-pthubert-raw-architecture-05

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

Hi  Pascal,

Thank you for the message. it sounds like we are aligned in principle now we just have to work out the details :-)

I'm not so concerned about splitting documents. I think the important thing is getting the text written and then letting the chairs run the wg process.  If we decide to split these individual documents they can always ask us to merge them as, foreign preparation for bring, a working group docs.

With respect to being a co-author, thank you for the offer. If I contribute sufficiently I will be glad to join, and I do hope to contribute time permitting.

See you soon. (Although I do plan on being in two different wgs in the first session - which is easier when we're virtual...)

Lou

----------
On March 8, 2021 5:55:59 AM "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hello Lou:
>
> Many thanks for the timely mail. I hope you can attend RAW today:
>
>> I have a some comments on the current draft - I mentioned these at the last
>> WG session but have been remiss in sending them to the list, my apologies!
>>
>> I really have two top level comments (detailed comments can wait until these
>> are sorted):
>>
>
>> 1) The document could use some further alignment with the WG
>> charter/direction.  We talked last year [1] about the document having some
>> pre-WG text and it would be aligned with WG scope/charter,  I think it has
>> improved, but still as work to go.
>>
>> An example of this is the Abstract.  That's pretty easy to fix, e.g., the
>> following, which is taken from the Charter, could be added ad as the abstract
>> and the first paragraph of the Intro section:
>>
>>      Reliable and Available Wireless (RAW) provides for high
>>      reliability and availability for IP connectivity over a
>>      wireless medium. The wireless medium presents significant
>>      challenges to achieve deterministic properties such as low
>>      packet error rate, bounded consecutive losses, and bounded
>>      latency. This document defines the RAW Architecture.  It
>>      builds on the DetNet Architecture and discusses specific
>>      challenges and technology considerations needed to deliver
>>      DetNet service utilizing scheduled wireless segments and
>>      other media, e.g., frequency/time-sharing physical media
>>      resources with stochastic traffic.
>
> I made this the abstract
>
>> But really this comment should be applied generally.
>
> Well, we'll have to be specific. Let's work together on this. The charter was updated by IESG from what we proposed at the BoF but I did not get a sense that the fundamentals had changed.
> Certainly if there is  a contradiction we need to fix it.
>
>>
>> 2) A somewhat related comment is that as an architecture document, the
>> document cover the full scope of the RAW problem space and leave room for
>> all types of wireless networks and integration/optimization approaches.  For
>> example, as I understand it, RAW's scope covers technologies where the IETF
>> has zero control over the technology and can only operate across a  'user'
>> network interface, e.g., one standardized by the IEEE, as well as technologies
>> where the IETF has significant freedom to define a customized and an IP-
>> integrated control solution, e.g., 6TiSCH.
>>
>
> Yes
>

Thanks!

>> As I read it, parts of the document are very focused on the latter, i.e., certain
>> types of wireless networks and a specific integrated optimization approach,
>> without allowing for the former.
>
> That was not the intention. The former is the main application for now. The intention is an over the (L2) top operation that brings dynamics / per packet control to the DetNet Service Layer to enable a better use of the radio diversity.
>
>> To me it seems you really have two (valid)
>> documents in one here.  The first is a foundation for the RAW architecture
>> document, the second is the basis for a framework document for RAW
>> networks whose radio layer and the IP layer control/management is fully
>> integrated.  If you split this work into two documents, I think we can have the
>> Architectural foundation for multiple solutions frameworks, where your
>> integrated framework is one and another can be based on the cooperative
>> layered architecture like the one I mentioned in [1] (e.g., as discussed
>> RFC5623, RFC7926 or many other teas documents, and could leverage DLEP).
>
> Looks like a great idea, need chair/AD approval since the charter reads "Architecture/Framework Aspects for a Wireless Network" as a single entity.
> And yes, the intention is certainly to leverage DLEP.
>
>
>>
>> What do you think? If you agree to the split, I'm happy to help with the
>> architecture document, although I also don't want to be the one to hold up
>> progress.
>
> For now I published a quick refresher that does not do the split yet -we'll discuss it today - and adds you as co-author, so you can contribute whether we split or not.
> Also: you have a pending invite on the github repo https://github.com/raw-wg/raw-architecture/invitations, please let me know if it does not work for you.
>
> Keep safe, Lou.
>
> Pascal
>
>
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> Lou
>>
>> [1]
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/raw/TYq4ZL3RZXRkUedOVCdivNGYKOs
>> /
>>
>>
>> --
>> RAW mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raw