Re: [Raw] Montreal and Chartering

Hi Pascal,

I am in favour of going through the generic model (we could consider and
see how URLLC, EHT (11ax/be) flows are managed) and extend to 6TiSCH later
when having addressed the 2-hop gaming scenarios with EHT.

Our experience says that the charter should be focused and concise.

regards
Xavi

Missatge de Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com> del dia dj., 2
de maig 2019 a les 18:13:

> Dear all:
>
>
>
> It’s probaly time to start preparing for a WG forming both in Montreal.
> The key element will be the proposed charter. It must justify a group but
> not attempt to boil the ocean.
>
>
>
> Though the BoF in Prague went really well, there was an uncertainty in the
> end on what we should aim for I the charter, that Lou expressed in a
> question.
>
>
>
>
>
>        Lou: You clarified what 6TiSCH does, can you clarify what PAW is to
> do?
>
>        Pascal: We expect this group to complete the dot of the 6TiSCH
> architecture, which describes both stochastic and deterministic flows. But
> 6TiSCH WG was focused on stochastic flows, and we expected to inherit from
> the work of detnet for deterministic flows. As we thought about it we
> decided to disband 6TiSCH and start a new group to do the deterministic
> part since 6TiSCH was not the right group to do it.
>
>        * Lou: would be good to clarify if this is going to be
> deterministic for 6TiSCH or for other type of radios.
>
>        * Pascal: Not just for 6TiSCH. Another reason that 6TiSCH is not
> appropriate for this work is that we want to extend the work to other radio
> technologies. We are presenting here four different radio technologies that
> we are addressing.
>
>
>
>
>
> Basically there is a duality: trying to adapt/extend DetNet and CCAMP to a
> generic scheduled wireless network in the one hand, and providing data
> models to program a deterministic track, which is an ask that we got at
> 6TISCH but does not generalize well to other radios. The difference is that
> on EHT and URLLC we do not program the physical resources (e.g., a resource
> block), but in all cases we ask for a guaranteed periodic resource to
> perform on hop, and then we assemble the hops with DetNet.
>
>
>
> 6TiSCH is special because we could configure down to the time slot, and
> use the time slot in/out as a G-MPLS switching resource..
>
>
>
> Seems to me that we could separate the G-MPLS piece as an extension to
> what we’d do on all radios, that is program a periodic resource for a flow
> identified by a flow ID in the packet. A 6TiSCH-specific draft could then
> explain how the PCE can program the timeslots and use that to elide the
> flow ID, in which case this is only a variation of the generic model that
> we’d define, a sort of compression. We can even leave it off charter on the
> first round if the charter seems confused or too greedy otherwise.
>
>
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
> Pascal
> --
> Raw mailing list
> Raw@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raw
>

-- 
Dr. Xavier Vilajosana
Wireless Networks Lab

*Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3)Professor*
(+34) 646 633 681
xvilajosana@uoc.edu <usuari@uoc.edu>
http://xvilajosana.org
http://wine.rdi.uoc.edu
Parc Mediterrani de la Tecnologia
Av Carl Friedrich Gauss 5, B3 Building
08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona). Catalonia. Spain
[image: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya]