Re: [TICTOC] Enterprise Profile

Kevin Gross <kevin.gross@avanw.com> Tue, 29 October 2013 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <kevin.gross@avanw.com>
X-Original-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C6F11E830F for <tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.186
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.186 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tTpVuIgja7iZ for <tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from qmta14.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta14.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:44:76:96:59:212]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78AD211E82FD for <tictoc@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.27]) by qmta14.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id j1kB1m00K0bG4ec5E3nBmX; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:47:11 +0000
Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com ([74.125.82.172]) by omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id j3lA1m00l3j4fmJ3P3lBhn; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:45:11 +0000
Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id q58so27351wes.31 for <tictoc@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:45:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=FYxLjWQYl9GJofSegeO24JTXcTebrcu8/cZbn7Kr7y0=; b=P7Yt7PIJxwmsGBTJGaXzg9IuOXXVCp8PBuPtVdyKYEfMt+aDPFz5OKifjclPVzuHSg mfVz56LUbk5OQtjJ379J+acjmvDLQW6M4QnXVS6PRjunWULJWHE8iyeacfrboNxHGq+8 j8B7V4t8fOV9Gduu76oclv/fRKI0MFdUrXczXxfhOaL3+93UqND6YHeV6gl98FledrjQ lCj3LzRslSgYB2oULuMrqosN7TgRi1xsBVOfCc47+xdIO8r4fO6OWL10D99X7Vr7Mc8g SfYV6ZgWWhj4qJGvcB+TBv7iNZapn1l42jL3ZGKhb9ZN4BGncKrM3GeMrAonN9uZci1m GrwA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.110.166 with SMTP id ib6mr446018wjb.14.1383061509793; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:45:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.202.7 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:45:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <B1D49063AD5FBD4688F3EEDEC68B20175114537C@BGB01XUD1011.national.core.bbc.co.uk>
References: <CACQYgzFmOtFY+Td0jZMyykeZ17KwAuCc+LY+C2be_UPgZKh9GA@mail.gmail.com> <B1D49063AD5FBD4688F3EEDEC68B201751132BDF@BGB01XUD1002.national.core.bbc.co.uk> <B1D49063AD5FBD4688F3EEDEC68B20175113E0AA@BGB01XUD1011.national.core.bbc.co.uk> <CACQYgzEEcZPLEBgyTPUyqYbRjNi_7oFvm7TVxhGthQL-hx6nYA@mail.gmail.com> <B1D49063AD5FBD4688F3EEDEC68B20175114537C@BGB01XUD1011.national.core.bbc.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 09:45:09 -0600
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q10rT9eyh40Udk1NQLHbREPPtxPSTYQ9GFKhZdeD7-EqA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kevin Gross <kevin.gross@avanw.com>
To: John Fletcher <John.Fletcher@bbc.co.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bf198e0fe711d04e9e319f7"
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1383061631; bh=FYxLjWQYl9GJofSegeO24JTXcTebrcu8/cZbn7Kr7y0=; h=Received:Received:Received:MIME-Version:Received:Date:Message-ID: Subject:From:To:Content-Type; b=FPchAGo8VLXUMmb3US3GHOXbuJ2djPJU8arNQZanp8yVatDpdrvys0pcJMWK1GJ1W 2grJvkfn/F/Y/9Ghb8Im2LyJ0aUVLsgISiOrMQCVsNgK+nlyJOXv5akomXu0hOUF6y sJlckgN5yhXX7b1BegdDo9Yo/1wkWl0ZcLZ4QEl3tt/a7dcDBKJwxcR3NHPosbpOkl aMtd7iEg2vGShyVPxBlDLICr4U/0BTJNuzDA4mwdhLHYO7AfKQzLRqyvoDF0nt4ZF/ WK9rYINlwgbgGUky2jdU3mOmTFguurWgetbzd0Cb1Z6moBcBqvOLzImx7vkZlM+NwG ZnQu4pnD4kVaA==
Cc: Douglas Arnold <doug.arnold2@gmail.com>, "tictoc@ietf.org" <tictoc@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TICTOC] Enterprise Profile
X-BeenThere: tictoc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Timing over IP Connection and Transfer of Clock BOF <tictoc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tictoc>
List-Post: <mailto:tictoc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:47:34 -0000

Multicast IP routing allows multicast messaging beyond a subnet. Multicast
IP routing is not available over the internet but it is now fairly common
on enterprise networks.

John, can you describe a use case for alternate timescales and explain how
the endstation can know that the timescale is correct local time or which
alternate timescale to use if there are multiple?

Kevin Gross
+1-303-447-0517
Media Network Consultant
AVA Networks - www.AVAnw.com <http://www.avanw.com/>


On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 4:18 AM, John Fletcher <John.Fletcher@bbc.co.uk>wrote:

>  Just to be clear, I am not suggesting use of a different epoch in
> timestamp fields.  I am talking about the optional TLV described in section
> 16.3 which can give you the offset(s) between PTP time and one or more
> timescales of your choice.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regarding spanning timezones, there is a difference between the extent of
> the enterprise network and the extent of the part of network served by a
> PTP master.  The latter is probably a subnet since multicast messages (e.g.
> Announce) are usually confined to a subnet.  A subnet spanning multiple
> timezones would be less common.  However you can have more than one
> Alternate Timescale if necessary.****
>
> ** **
>
> This feature is just an option; I’m not suggesting it be required, just
> that it not be forbidden.****
>
> ** **
>
> John****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Douglas Arnold [mailto:doug.arnold2@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 28 October 2013 20:06
> *To:* John Fletcher
>
> *Cc:* tictoc@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [TICTOC] Enterprise Profile****
>
> ** **
>
> Hello John,****
>
> ** **
>
> I agree that local time is useful.  I would not be averse to creating a
> TLV to distribute local time offset, so that end node can convert to local
> time and present it to users.****
>
> ** **
>
> However, I do not support the idea of using a local time epoch in the PTP
> timestamp fields. This is an allowed option in IEEE 1588-2008, but I
> believe that this is likely to cause interoperability problems, when some
> vendors support it and others do not.  Also some system architechs have
> indicated that they deploy PTP across large networks, which span time
> zones. This is the feature that should be forbidden.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> In the NTP standard (RFC5905) the timestamps in the packet all use a
> specific time epoch, and generate all other desired time epoch as
> corrections performed at the end points.  Note also that in most computer
> operating systems a single standard time epoch is used in and local time is
> generated at the presentation layer for human readable interfaces.****
>
> ** **
>
> Doug****
>
> ** **
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:10 AM, John Fletcher <John.Fletcher@bbc.co.uk>
> wrote:****
>
> I'd also like to ask that you don't prohibit the Alternate Timescales
> option.  This is potentially useful to distribute "local time" (your
> time-zone and dst) and there doesn't seem to be any need to prohibit it. *
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> John****
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* tictoc-bounces@ietf.org [tictoc-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of
> John Fletcher [John.Fletcher@bbc.co.uk]
> *Sent:* 25 October 2013 11:01
> *To:* Douglas Arnold
> *Cc:* tictoc@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [TICTOC] Enterprise Profile****
>
> Doug,****
>
>  ****
>
> I would be interested to know the circumstances when you see the maximum
> phase adjustment information being used.****
>
>  ****
>
> Some comments:****
>
>  ****
>
> In section 6, you say, “In all three of the delay measurement modes…”.  At
> that point in the text you have not yet mentioned multicast, hybrid and
> unicast modes so it’s not clear which modes you are referring to.****
>
>  ****
>
> In section 9, you say, “Slaves SHOULD NOT Synchronize to a Rogue Master.”
> It’s not clear how a slave would know that a master is rogue; presumably it
> would need to examine the announce messages of all masters and do its own
> BMCA evaluation.  A more realistic “rogue” master would probably meet the
> BMCA criteria for selection.****
>
>  ****
>
> In section 12, “Alternative Time Scales” should be “Alternate Timescales”.
> ****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> Regards,****
>
> John Fletcher****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* tictoc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:tictoc-bounces@ietf.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Douglas Arnold
> *Sent:* 25 October 2013 01:35
> *To:* tictoc@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [TICTOC] Enterprise Profile****
>
>  ****
>
> Hello Everyone,****
>
>  ****
>
> Attached is an updated version of the Enterprise profile.  Sorry I missed
> the upload deadline for  the Vancouver meeting.  If you get a chance to
> look at it before then I will be there and would love to discuss it. ****
>
>  ****
>
> Summary of changes:****
>
>  ****
>
> I also changed the TLV format to fit the latest proposal in the 1588
> revision.  ****
>
>  ****
>
> I added a statement about not going into the master state unless one had a
> current UTC offset.  ****
>
>  ****
>
> I added to the TLV fields to indicate maximum phase correction over a sync
> cycle.****
>
>  ****
>
> -- ****
>
> Doug Arnold****
>
> Principal Technologist****
>
> *JTime!* Meinberg USA****
>
> +1-707-303-5559****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> ----------------------------
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal
> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
> If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
> Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
> reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
> Further communication will signify your consent to this.****
>
> ---------------------****
>
>  ****
>
> ----------------------------
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal
> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
> If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
> Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
> reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
> Further communication will signify your consent to this.****
>
> ---------------------****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> -- ****
>
> Doug****
>