draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-18.txt | draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-19.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Internet Engineering Task Force E. Grossman, Ed. | Internet Engineering Task Force E. Grossman, Ed. | |||
Internet-Draft DOLBY | Internet-Draft DOLBY | |||
Intended status: Informational September 17, 2018 | Intended status: Informational October 8, 2018 | |||
Expires: March 21, 2019 | Expires: April 11, 2019 | |||
Deterministic Networking Use Cases | Deterministic Networking Use Cases | |||
draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-18 | draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-19 | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
This draft documents use cases in several diverse industries to | This draft presents use cases from diverse industries which have in | |||
establish multi-hop paths for characterized flows with deterministic | common a need for "deterministic flows". "Deterministic" in this | |||
properties. In this context deterministic implies that flows can be | context means that such flows provide guaranteed bandwidth, bounded | |||
established which provide guaranteed bandwidth and latency which can | latency, and other properties germane to the transport of time- | |||
be established from either a Layer 2 or Layer 3 (IP) interface, and | sensitive data. These use cases differ notably in their network | |||
which can co-exist on an IP network with best-effort traffic. | topologies and specific desired behavior, providing as a group broad | |||
industry context for DetNet. For each use case, this document will | ||||
Additional use case properties include optional redundant paths, very | identify the use case, identify representative solutions used today, | |||
high reliability paths, time synchronization, and clock distribution. | and describe potential improvements that DetNet can enable. The Use | |||
Industries considered include professional audio, electrical | Case Common Themes section then extracts and enumerates the set of | |||
utilities, building automation systems, wireless for industrial, | common properties implied by these use cases. | |||
cellular radio, industrial machine-to-machine, mining, private | ||||
blockchain, and network slicing. | ||||
For each case, this document will identify the application, identify | ||||
representative solutions used today, and the improvements IETF DetNet | ||||
solutions may enable. | ||||
Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 21, 2019. | This Internet-Draft will expire on April 11, 2019. | |||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
described in the Simplified BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
2. Pro Audio and Video . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2. Pro Audio and Video . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
2.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
2.1.1. Uninterrupted Stream Playback . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.1.1. Uninterrupted Stream Playback . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
2.1.2. Synchronized Stream Playback . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.1.2. Synchronized Stream Playback . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
2.1.3. Sound Reinforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 2.1.3. Sound Reinforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
2.1.4. Deterministic Time to Establish Streaming . . . . . . 8 | 2.1.4. Secure Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
2.1.5. Secure Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 2.1.4.1. Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
2.1.5.1. Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | ||||
2.2. Pro Audio Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 2.2. Pro Audio Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
2.3. Pro Audio Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 2.3. Pro Audio Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
2.3.1. Layer 3 Interconnecting Layer 2 Islands . . . . . . . 9 | 2.3.1. Layer 3 Interconnecting Layer 2 Islands . . . . . . . 9 | |||
2.3.2. High Reliability Stream Paths . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 2.3.2. High Reliability Stream Paths . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
2.3.3. Integration of Reserved Streams into IT Networks . . 10 | 2.3.3. Integration of Reserved Streams into IT Networks . . 10 | |||
2.3.4. Use of Unused Reservations by Best-Effort Traffic . . 10 | 2.3.4. Use of Unused Reservations by Best-Effort Traffic . . 10 | |||
2.3.5. Traffic Segregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 2.3.5. Traffic Segregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
2.3.5.1. Packet Forwarding Rules, VLANs and Subnets . . . 11 | 2.3.5.1. Packet Forwarding Rules, VLANs and Subnets . . . 11 | |||
2.3.5.2. Multicast Addressing (IPv4 and IPv6) . . . . . . 11 | 2.3.5.2. Multicast Addressing (IPv4 and IPv6) . . . . . . 11 | |||
2.3.6. Latency Optimization by a Central Controller . . . . 11 | 2.3.6. Latency Optimization by a Central Controller . . . . 11 | |||
2.3.7. Reduced Device Cost Due To Reduced Buffer Memory . . 11 | 2.3.7. Reduced Device Cost Due To Reduced Buffer Memory . . 12 | |||
2.4. Pro Audio Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 2.4. Pro Audio Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
3. Electrical Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 3. Electrical Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
3.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 3.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
3.1.1. Transmission Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 3.1.1. Transmission Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
3.1.1.1. Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 3.1.1.1. Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
3.1.1.2. Intra-Substation Process Bus Communications . . . 18 | 3.1.1.2. Intra-Substation Process Bus Communications . . . 18 | |||
3.1.1.3. Wide Area Monitoring and Control Systems . . . . 19 | 3.1.1.3. Wide Area Monitoring and Control Systems . . . . 19 | |||
3.1.1.4. IEC 61850 WAN engineering guidelines requirement | 3.1.1.4. IEC 61850 WAN engineering guidelines requirement | |||
classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
3.1.2. Generation Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 3.1.2. Generation Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
3.1.2.1. Control of the Generated Power . . . . . . . . . 21 | 3.1.2.1. Control of the Generated Power . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
3.1.2.2. Control of the Generation Infrastructure . . . . 22 | 3.1.2.2. Control of the Generation Infrastructure . . . . 22 | |||
3.1.3. Distribution use case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | 3.1.3. Distribution use case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
3.1.3.1. Fault Location Isolation and Service Restoration | 3.1.3.1. Fault Location Isolation and Service Restoration | |||
skipping to change at page 5, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 44 ¶ | |||
11.1.3. Standardized Data Flow Information Models . . . . . 70 | 11.1.3. Standardized Data Flow Information Models . . . . . 70 | |||
11.1.4. L2 and L3 Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | 11.1.4. L2 and L3 Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | |||
11.1.5. Consideration for IPv4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | 11.1.5. Consideration for IPv4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | |||
11.1.6. Guaranteed End-to-End Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | 11.1.6. Guaranteed End-to-End Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | |||
11.1.7. Replacement for Multiple Proprietary Deterministic | 11.1.7. Replacement for Multiple Proprietary Deterministic | |||
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | |||
11.1.8. Mix of Deterministic and Best-Effort Traffic . . . . 71 | 11.1.8. Mix of Deterministic and Best-Effort Traffic . . . . 71 | |||
11.1.9. Unused Reserved BW to be Available to Best Effort | 11.1.9. Unused Reserved BW to be Available to Best Effort | |||
Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 | Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 | |||
11.1.10. Lower Cost, Multi-Vendor Solutions . . . . . . . . . 71 | 11.1.10. Lower Cost, Multi-Vendor Solutions . . . . . . . . . 71 | |||
11.2. Scalable Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 | 11.2. Scalable Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 | |||
11.3. Scalable Timing Parameters and Accuracy . . . . . . . . 71 | 11.2.1. Scalable Number of Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 | |||
11.3.1. Bounded Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 | 11.3. Scalable Timing Parameters and Accuracy . . . . . . . . 72 | |||
11.3.1. Bounded Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | ||||
11.3.2. Low Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | 11.3.2. Low Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | |||
11.3.3. Symmetrical Path Delays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | 11.3.3. Bounded Jitter (Latency Variation) . . . . . . . . . 72 | |||
11.3.4. Symmetrical Path Delays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | ||||
11.4. High Reliability and Availability . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | 11.4. High Reliability and Availability . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | |||
11.5. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | 11.5. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | |||
11.6. Deterministic Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | 11.6. Deterministic Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | |||
12. Use Cases Explicitly Out of Scope for DetNet . . . . . . . . 73 | 12. Use Cases Explicitly Out of Scope for DetNet . . . . . . . . 73 | |||
12.1. DetNet Scope Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | 12.1. DetNet Scope Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | |||
12.2. Internet-based Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | 12.2. Internet-based Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | |||
12.2.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | 12.2.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | |||
12.2.1.1. Media Content Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | 12.2.1.1. Media Content Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | |||
12.2.1.2. Online Gaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | 12.2.1.2. Online Gaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | |||
12.2.1.3. Virtual Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | 12.2.1.3. Virtual Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | |||
12.2.2. Internet-Based Applications Today . . . . . . . . . 74 | 12.2.2. Internet-Based Applications Today . . . . . . . . . 75 | |||
12.2.3. Internet-Based Applications Future . . . . . . . . . 74 | 12.2.3. Internet-Based Applications Future . . . . . . . . . 75 | |||
12.2.4. Internet-Based Applications Asks . . . . . . . . . . 75 | 12.2.4. Internet-Based Applications Asks . . . . . . . . . . 75 | |||
12.3. Pro Audio and Video - Digital Rights Management (DRM) . 75 | 12.3. Pro Audio and Video - Digital Rights Management (DRM) . 75 | |||
12.4. Pro Audio and Video - Link Aggregation . . . . . . . . . 75 | 12.4. Pro Audio and Video - Link Aggregation . . . . . . . . . 76 | |||
13. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 | 12.5. Pro Audio and Video - Deterministic Time to Establish | |||
14. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 | Streaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 | |||
14.1. Pro Audio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 | 13. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 | |||
14.2. Utility Telecom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 | 14. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 | |||
14.3. Building Automation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 | 15. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 | |||
14.4. Wireless for Industrial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 | 15.1. Pro Audio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 | |||
14.5. Cellular Radio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 | 15.2. Utility Telecom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | |||
14.6. Industrial M2M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | 15.3. Building Automation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | |||
14.7. Internet Applications and CoMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | 15.4. Wireless for Industrial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | |||
14.8. Electrical Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | 15.5. Cellular Radio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | |||
14.9. Network Slicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | 15.6. Industrial M2M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | |||
14.10. Mining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | 15.7. Internet Applications and CoMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 | |||
14.11. Private Blockchain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | 15.8. Network Slicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 | |||
15. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | 15.9. Mining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 | |||
16. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 | 15.10. Private Blockchain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 | |||
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 | 16. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 | |||
17. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 | ||||
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 | ||||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
This draft presents use cases from diverse industries which have in | This draft documents use cases in diverse industries which require | |||
common a need for deterministic flows, but which also differ notably | deterministic flows over multi-hop paths. DetNet flows can be | |||
in their network topologies and specific desired behavior. Together, | established from either a Layer 2 or Layer 3 (IP) interface, and such | |||
they provide broad industry context for DetNet and a yardstick | flows can co-exist on an IP network with best-effort traffic. DetNet | |||
against which proposed DetNet designs can be measured (to what extent | also provides for highly reliable flows through provision for | |||
does a proposed design satisfy these various use cases?) | redundant paths. | |||
For DetNet, use cases explicitly do not define requirements; The | The DetNet Use Cases explicitly do not suggest any specific design | |||
DetNet WG will consider the use cases, decide which elements are in | for DetNet architecture or protocols; these are topics of other | |||
scope for DetNet, and the results will be incorporated into future | DetNet drafts. | |||
drafts. Similarly, the DetNet use case draft explicitly does not | ||||
suggest any specific design, architecture or protocols, which will be | ||||
topics of future drafts. | ||||
We present for each use case the answers to the following questions: | The DetNet use cases as originally submitted explicitly were not | |||
considered by the DetNet Working Group to be concrete requirements; | ||||
The DetNet Working Group and Design Team considered these use cases, | ||||
identifying which elements of them could be feasibly implemented | ||||
within the charter of DetNet, and as a result certain of the | ||||
originally submitted use cases (or elements of them) have been be | ||||
moved to the Use Cases Explicitly Out of Scope for DetNet section. | ||||
The DetNet Use Cases document provide context regarding DetNet design | ||||
decisions. It also serves a long-lived purpose of helping those | ||||
learning (or new to) DetNet to understand the types of applications | ||||
that can be supported by DetNet. It also allow those WG contributors | ||||
who are users to ensure that their concerns are addressed by the WG; | ||||
for them this document both covers their contribution and provides a | ||||
long term reference to the problems they expect to be served by the | ||||
technology, both in the short term deliverables and as the technology | ||||
evolves in the future. | ||||
The DetNet Use Cases document has served as a "yardstick" against | ||||
which proposed DetNet designs can be measured, answering the question | ||||
"to what extent does a proposed design satisfy these various use | ||||
cases?" | ||||
The Use Case industries covered are professional audio, electrical | ||||
utilities, building automation systems, wireless for industrial, | ||||
cellular radio, industrial machine-to-machine, mining, private | ||||
blockchain, and network slicing. For each use case the following | ||||
questions are answered: | ||||
o What is the use case? | o What is the use case? | |||
o How is it addressed today? | o How is it addressed today? | |||
o How would you like it to be addressed in the future? | o How should it be addressed in the future? | |||
o What do you want the IETF to deliver? | o What should the IETF deliver to enable this use case? | |||
The level of detail in each use case should be sufficient to express | The level of detail in each use case is intended to be sufficient to | |||
the relevant elements of the use case, but not more. | express the relevant elements of the use case, but not greater than | |||
that. | ||||
At the end we consider the use cases collectively, and examine the | DetNet does not directly address clock distribution or time | |||
most significant goals they have in common. | synchronization; these are considered to be part of the overall | |||
design and implementation of a time-sensitive network, using existing | ||||
(or future) time-specific protocols (such as [IEEE8021AS] and/or | ||||
[RFC5905]). | ||||
2. Pro Audio and Video | 2. Pro Audio and Video | |||
2.1. Use Case Description | 2.1. Use Case Description | |||
The professional audio and video industry ("ProAV") includes: | The professional audio and video industry ("ProAV") includes: | |||
o Music and film content creation | o Music and film content creation | |||
o Broadcast | o Broadcast | |||
skipping to change at page 8, line 36 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 14 ¶ | |||
In some cases local performers must perform in synchrony with a | In some cases local performers must perform in synchrony with a | |||
remote broadcast. In such cases the latencies of the broadcast | remote broadcast. In such cases the latencies of the broadcast | |||
stream and the local performer must be adjusted to match each other, | stream and the local performer must be adjusted to match each other, | |||
with a worst case of one video frame (33ms for NTSC video). | with a worst case of one video frame (33ms for NTSC video). | |||
In cases where audio phase is a consideration, for example beam- | In cases where audio phase is a consideration, for example beam- | |||
forming using multiple speakers, latency can be in the 10 microsecond | forming using multiple speakers, latency can be in the 10 microsecond | |||
range (1 audio sample at 96kHz). | range (1 audio sample at 96kHz). | |||
2.1.4. Deterministic Time to Establish Streaming | 2.1.4. Secure Transmission | |||
Note: The WG has decided that guidelines for deterministic time to | ||||
establish stream startup is not within scope of DetNet. If bounded | ||||
timing of establishing or re-establish streams is required in a given | ||||
use case, it is up to the application/system to achieve this. (The | ||||
supporting text from this section has been removed as of draft 12). | ||||
2.1.5. Secure Transmission | ||||
2.1.5.1. Safety | 2.1.4.1. Safety | |||
Professional audio systems can include amplifiers that are capable of | Professional audio systems can include amplifiers that are capable of | |||
generating hundreds or thousands of watts of audio power which if | generating hundreds or thousands of watts of audio power which if | |||
used incorrectly can cause hearing damage to those in the vicinity. | used incorrectly can cause hearing damage to those in the vicinity. | |||
Apart from the usual care required by the systems operators to | Apart from the usual care required by the systems operators to | |||
prevent such incidents, the network traffic that controls these | prevent such incidents, the network traffic that controls these | |||
devices must be secured (as with any sensitive application traffic). | devices must be secured (as with any sensitive application traffic). | |||
2.2. Pro Audio Today | 2.2. Pro Audio Today | |||
Some proprietary systems have been created which enable deterministic | Some proprietary systems have been created which enable deterministic | |||
streams at Layer 3 however they are "engineered networks" which | streams at Layer 3 however they are "engineered networks" which | |||
require careful configuration to operate, often require that the | require careful configuration to operate, often require that the | |||
system be over-provisioned, and it is implied that all devices on the | system be over-provisioned, and it is implied that all devices on the | |||
network voluntarily play by the rules of that network. To enable | network voluntarily play by the rules of that network. To enable | |||
these industries to successfully transition to an interoperable | these industries to successfully transition to an interoperable | |||
multi-vendor packet-based infrastructure requires effective open | multi-vendor packet-based infrastructure requires effective open | |||
standards, and we believe that establishing relevant IETF standards | standards, and establishing relevant IETF standards is a crucial | |||
is a crucial factor. | factor. | |||
2.3. Pro Audio Future | 2.3. Pro Audio Future | |||
2.3.1. Layer 3 Interconnecting Layer 2 Islands | 2.3.1. Layer 3 Interconnecting Layer 2 Islands | |||
It would be valuable to enable IP to connect multiple Layer 2 LANs. | It would be valuable to enable IP to connect multiple Layer 2 LANs. | |||
As an example, ESPN recently constructed a state-of-the-art 194,000 | As an example, ESPN recently constructed a state-of-the-art 194,000 | |||
sq ft, $125 million broadcast studio called DC2. The DC2 network is | sq ft, $125 million broadcast studio called DC2. The DC2 network is | |||
capable of handling 46 Tbps of throughput with 60,000 simultaneous | capable of handling 46 Tbps of throughput with 60,000 simultaneous | |||
skipping to change at page 12, line 36 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 4 ¶ | |||
o Single network for A/V and IT traffic | o Single network for A/V and IT traffic | |||
o Standards-based, interoperable, multi-vendor | o Standards-based, interoperable, multi-vendor | |||
o IT department friendly | o IT department friendly | |||
o Enterprise-wide networks (e.g. size of San Francisco but not the | o Enterprise-wide networks (e.g. size of San Francisco but not the | |||
whole Internet (yet...)) | whole Internet (yet...)) | |||
3. Electrical Utilities | 3. Electrical Utilities | |||
3.1. Use Case Description | 3.1. Use Case Description | |||
Many systems that an electrical utility deploys today rely on high | Many systems that an electrical utility deploys today rely on high | |||
availability and deterministic behavior of the underlying networks. | availability and deterministic behavior of the underlying networks. | |||
Here we present use cases in Transmission, Generation and | Presented here are use cases in Transmission, Generation and | |||
Distribution, including key timing and reliability metrics. We also | Distribution, including key timing and reliability metrics. In | |||
discuss security issues and industry trends which affect the | addition, security issues and industry trends which affect the | |||
architecture of next generation utility networks | architecture of next generation utility networks are discussed. | |||
3.1.1. Transmission Use Cases | 3.1.1. Transmission Use Cases | |||
3.1.1.1. Protection | 3.1.1.1. Protection | |||
Protection means not only the protection of human operators but also | Protection means not only the protection of human operators but also | |||
the protection of the electrical equipment and the preservation of | the protection of the electrical equipment and the preservation of | |||
the stability and frequency of the grid. If a fault occurs in the | the stability and frequency of the grid. If a fault occurs in the | |||
transmission or distribution of electricity then severe damage can | transmission or distribution of electricity then severe damage can | |||
occur to human operators, electrical equipment and the grid itself, | occur to human operators, electrical equipment and the grid itself, | |||
leading to blackouts. | leading to blackouts. | |||
Communication links in conjunction with protection relays are used to | Communication links in conjunction with protection relays are used to | |||
skipping to change at page 22, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 29 ¶ | |||
| | Mandatory | | | | Mandatory | | |||
| Redundancy | Yes | | | Redundancy | Yes | | |||
| Packet loss | 1% | | | Packet loss | 1% | | |||
+---------------------------------------------------+---------------+ | +---------------------------------------------------+---------------+ | |||
Table 9: FCAG Communication Requirements | Table 9: FCAG Communication Requirements | |||
3.1.2.2. Control of the Generation Infrastructure | 3.1.2.2. Control of the Generation Infrastructure | |||
The control of the generation infrastructure combines requirements | The control of the generation infrastructure combines requirements | |||
from industrial automation systems and energy generation systems. In | from industrial automation systems and energy generation systems. | |||
this section we present the use case of the control of the generation | This section considers the use case of the control of the generation | |||
infrastructure of a wind turbine. | infrastructure of a wind turbine. | |||
| | | | |||
| | | | |||
| +-----------------+ | | +-----------------+ | |||
| | +----+ | | | | +----+ | | |||
| | |WTRM| WGEN | | | | |WTRM| WGEN | | |||
WROT x==|===| | | | WROT x==|===| | | | |||
| | +----+ WCNV| | | | +----+ WCNV| | |||
| |WNAC | | | |WNAC | | |||
skipping to change at page 26, line 25 ¶ | skipping to change at page 26, line 25 ¶ | |||
+--------------+ | XXXXXXX XX | | | +--------------+ | XXXXXXX XX | | | |||
| | | XX XXXXXXX +----------------+ | | | | XX XXXXXXX +----------------+ | |||
| | | XXXXX | | | | XXXXX | |||
| Wind Park #2 +----+ | | Wind Park #2 +----+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
| | | | | | |||
+--------------+ | +--------------+ | |||
Figure 2: Wind Turbine Control via Internet | Figure 2: Wind Turbine Control via Internet | |||
We expect future use cases which require bounded latency, bounded | Future use cases will require bounded latency, bounded jitter and | |||
jitter and extraordinary low packet loss for inter-domain traffic | extraordinary low packet loss for inter-domain traffic flows due to | |||
flows due to the softwarization and virtualization of core wind farm | the softwarization and virtualization of core wind farm equipment | |||
equipment (e.g. switches, firewalls and SCADA server components). | (e.g. switches, firewalls and SCADA server components). These | |||
These factors will create opportunities for service providers to | factors will create opportunities for service providers to install | |||
install new services and dynamically manage them from remote | new services and dynamically manage them from remote locations. For | |||
locations. For example, to enable fail-over of a local SCADA server, | example, to enable fail-over of a local SCADA server, a SCADA server | |||
a SCADA server in another wind farm site (under the administrative | in another wind farm site (under the administrative control of the | |||
control of the same operator) could be utilized temporarily | same operator) could be utilized temporarily (Figure 3). In that | |||
(Figure 3). In that case local traffic would be forwarded to the | case local traffic would be forwarded to the remote SCADA server and | |||
remote SCADA server and existing intra-domain QoS and timing | existing intra-domain QoS and timing parameters would have to be met | |||
parameters would have to be met for inter-domain traffic flows. | for inter-domain traffic flows. | |||
+--------------+ | +--------------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
| | | | | | |||
| Wind Park #1 +----+ | | Wind Park #1 +----+ | |||
| | | XXXXXX | | | | XXXXXX | |||
| | | X XXXXXXXX +----------------+ | | | | X XXXXXXXX +----------------+ | |||
+--------------+ | XXXX XXXXX | | | +--------------+ | XXXX XXXXX | | | |||
+---+ Operator XXX | Remote Control | | +---+ Operator XXX | Remote Control | | |||
XXX Administered +----+ Center | | XXX Administered +----+ Center | | |||
skipping to change at page 30, line 50 ¶ | skipping to change at page 30, line 50 ¶ | |||
IPv6 is seen as a future telecommunications technology for the Smart | IPv6 is seen as a future telecommunications technology for the Smart | |||
Grid; the IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) and | Grid; the IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) and | |||
different National Committees have mandated a specific adhoc group | different National Committees have mandated a specific adhoc group | |||
(AHG8) to define the migration strategy to IPv6 for all the IEC TC57 | (AHG8) to define the migration strategy to IPv6 for all the IEC TC57 | |||
power automation standards. The AHG8 has recently finalised the work | power automation standards. The AHG8 has recently finalised the work | |||
on the migration strategy and the following Technical Report has been | on the migration strategy and the following Technical Report has been | |||
issued: IEC TR 62357-200:2015: Guidelines for migration from Internet | issued: IEC TR 62357-200:2015: Guidelines for migration from Internet | |||
Protocol version 4 (IPv4) to Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6). | Protocol version 4 (IPv4) to Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6). | |||
We expect cloud-based SCADA systems to control and monitor the | Cloud-based SCADA systems will control and monitor the critical and | |||
critical and non-critical subsystems of generation systems, for | non-critical subsystems of generation systems, for example wind | |||
example wind farms. | farms. | |||
3.3.1. Migration to Packet-Switched Network | 3.3.1. Migration to Packet-Switched Network | |||
Throughout the world, utilities are increasingly planning for a | Throughout the world, utilities are increasingly planning for a | |||
future based on smart grid applications requiring advanced | future based on smart grid applications requiring advanced | |||
telecommunications systems. Many of these applications utilize | telecommunications systems. Many of these applications utilize | |||
packet connectivity for communicating information and control signals | packet connectivity for communicating information and control signals | |||
across the utility's Wide Area Network (WAN), made possible by | across the utility's Wide Area Network (WAN), made possible by | |||
technologies such as multiprotocol label switching (MPLS). The data | technologies such as multiprotocol label switching (MPLS). The data | |||
that traverses the utility WAN includes: | that traverses the utility WAN includes: | |||
skipping to change at page 41, line 35 ¶ | skipping to change at page 41, line 35 ¶ | |||
so security is definitely a concern, yet security features are not | so security is definitely a concern, yet security features are not | |||
available in the majority of BAS field network deployments . | available in the majority of BAS field network deployments . | |||
The management network, being an IP-based network, has the protocols | The management network, being an IP-based network, has the protocols | |||
available to enable network security, but in practice many BAS | available to enable network security, but in practice many BAS | |||
systems do not implement even the available security features such as | systems do not implement even the available security features such as | |||
device authentication or encryption for data in transit. | device authentication or encryption for data in transit. | |||
4.3. BAS Future | 4.3. BAS Future | |||
In the future we expect more fine-grained environmental monitoring | In the future more fine-grained environmental monitoring and lower | |||
and lower energy consumption, which will require more sensors and | energy consumption will emerge which will require more sensors and | |||
devices, thus requiring larger and more complex building networks. | devices, thus requiring larger and more complex building networks. | |||
We expect building networks to be connected to or converged with | Building networks will be connected to or converged with other | |||
other networks (Enterprise network, Home network, and Internet). | networks (Enterprise network, Home network, and Internet). | |||
Therefore better facilities for network management, control, | Therefore better facilities for network management, control, | |||
reliability and security are critical in order to improve resident | reliability and security are critical in order to improve resident | |||
and operator convenience and comfort. For example the ability to | and operator convenience and comfort. For example the ability to | |||
monitor and control building devices via the internet would enable | monitor and control building devices via the internet would enable | |||
(for example) control of room lights or HVAC from a resident's | (for example) control of room lights or HVAC from a resident's | |||
desktop PC or phone application. | desktop PC or phone application. | |||
4.4. BAS Asks | 4.4. BAS Asks | |||
skipping to change at page 43, line 14 ¶ | skipping to change at page 43, line 14 ¶ | |||
market. For example, a 1% cost reduction in some areas could save | market. For example, a 1% cost reduction in some areas could save | |||
$100B | $100B | |||
5.1.1. Network Convergence using 6TiSCH | 5.1.1. Network Convergence using 6TiSCH | |||
Some wireless network technologies support real-time QoS, and are | Some wireless network technologies support real-time QoS, and are | |||
thus useful for these kinds of networks, but others do not. For | thus useful for these kinds of networks, but others do not. For | |||
example WiFi is pervasive but does not provide guaranteed timing or | example WiFi is pervasive but does not provide guaranteed timing or | |||
delivery of packets, and thus is not useful in this context. | delivery of packets, and thus is not useful in this context. | |||
In this use case we focus on one specific wireless network technology | This use case focuses on one specific wireless network technology | |||
which does provide the required deterministic QoS, which is "IPv6 | which provides the required deterministic QoS, which is "IPv6 over | |||
over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e" (6TiSCH, where TSCH stands for | the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e" (6TiSCH, where TSCH stands for | |||
"Time-Slotted Channel Hopping", see [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture], | "Time-Slotted Channel Hopping", see [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture], | |||
[IEEE802154], [IEEE802154e], and [RFC7554]). | [IEEE802154], [IEEE802154e], and [RFC7554]). | |||
There are other deterministic wireless busses and networks available | There are other deterministic wireless busses and networks available | |||
today, however they are imcompatible with each other, and | today, however they are imcompatible with each other, and | |||
incompatible with IP traffic (for example [ISA100], [WirelessHART]). | incompatible with IP traffic (for example [ISA100], [WirelessHART]). | |||
Thus the primary goal of this use case is to apply 6TiSCH as a | Thus the primary goal of this use case is to apply 6TiSCH as a | |||
converged IP- and standards-based wireless network for industrial | converged IP- and standards-based wireless network for industrial | |||
applications, i.e. to replace multiple proprietary and/or | applications, i.e. to replace multiple proprietary and/or | |||
skipping to change at page 44, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 44, line 38 ¶ | |||
deterministic wireless networks which are incompatible with each | deterministic wireless networks which are incompatible with each | |||
other and with IP traffic. | other and with IP traffic. | |||
6TiSCH is not yet fully specified, so it cannot be used in today's | 6TiSCH is not yet fully specified, so it cannot be used in today's | |||
applications. | applications. | |||
5.3. Wireless Industrial Future | 5.3. Wireless Industrial Future | |||
5.3.1. Unified Wireless Network and Management | 5.3.1. Unified Wireless Network and Management | |||
We expect DetNet and 6TiSCH together to enable converged transport of | DetNet and 6TiSCH together can enable converged transport of | |||
deterministic and best-effort traffic flows between real-time | deterministic and best-effort traffic flows between real-time | |||
industrial devices and wide area networks via IP routing. A high | industrial devices and wide area networks via IP routing. A high | |||
level view of a basic such network is shown in Figure 7. | level view of a basic such network is shown in Figure 7. | |||
---+-------- ............ ------------ | ---+-------- ............ ------------ | |||
| External Network | | | External Network | | |||
| +-----+ | | +-----+ | |||
+-----+ | NME | | +-----+ | NME | | |||
| | LLN Border | | | | | LLN Border | | | |||
| | router +-----+ | | | router +-----+ | |||
skipping to change at page 45, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 45, line 48 ¶ | |||
o | | router | | router | | router | o | | router | | router | | router | |||
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | |||
o o o o o | o o o o o | |||
o o o o o o o o o o o | o o o o o o o o o o o | |||
o o o LLN o o o o | o o o LLN o o o o | |||
o o o o o o o o o o o o | o o o o o o o o o o o o | |||
Figure 8: Extended 6TiSCH Network | Figure 8: Extended 6TiSCH Network | |||
The backbone router must ensure end-to-end deterministic behavior | The backbone router must ensure end-to-end deterministic behavior | |||
between the LLN and the backbone. We would like to see this | between the LLN and the backbone. This should be accomplished in | |||
accomplished in conformance with the work done in | conformance with the work done in [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] with | |||
[I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] with respect to Layer-3 aspects of | respect to Layer-3 aspects of deterministic networks that span | |||
deterministic networks that span multiple Layer-2 domains. | multiple Layer-2 domains. | |||
The PCE must compute a deterministic path end-to-end across the TSCH | The PCE must compute a deterministic path end-to-end across the TSCH | |||
network and IEEE802.1 TSN Ethernet backbone, and DetNet protocols are | network and IEEE802.1 TSN Ethernet backbone, and DetNet protocols are | |||
expected to enable end-to-end deterministic forwarding. | expected to enable end-to-end deterministic forwarding. | |||
+-----+ | +-----+ | |||
| IoT | | | IoT | | |||
| G/W | | | G/W | | |||
+-----+ | +-----+ | |||
^ <---- Elimination | ^ <---- Elimination | |||
skipping to change at page 47, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 47, line 29 ¶ | |||
solutions, and the forwarding decision is to try the preferred one | solutions, and the forwarding decision is to try the preferred one | |||
and use the other in case of Layer-2 transmission failure as detected | and use the other in case of Layer-2 transmission failure as detected | |||
by ARQ. | by ARQ. | |||
5.3.2. Schedule Management by a PCE | 5.3.2. Schedule Management by a PCE | |||
A common feature of 6TiSCH and DetNet is the action of a PCE to | A common feature of 6TiSCH and DetNet is the action of a PCE to | |||
configure paths through the network. Specifically, what is needed is | configure paths through the network. Specifically, what is needed is | |||
a protocol and data model that the PCE will use to get/set the | a protocol and data model that the PCE will use to get/set the | |||
relevant configuration from/to the devices, as well as perform | relevant configuration from/to the devices, as well as perform | |||
operations on the devices. We expect that this protocol will be | operations on the devices. This protocol should be developed by | |||
developed by DetNet with consideration for its reuse by 6TiSCH. The | DetNet with consideration for its reuse by 6TiSCH. The remainder of | |||
remainder of this section provides a bit more context from the 6TiSCH | this section provides a bit more context from the 6TiSCH side. | |||
side. | ||||
5.3.2.1. PCE Commands and 6TiSCH CoAP Requests | 5.3.2.1. PCE Commands and 6TiSCH CoAP Requests | |||
The 6TiSCH device does not expect to place the request for bandwidth | The 6TiSCH device does not expect to place the request for bandwidth | |||
between itself and another device in the network. Rather, an | between itself and another device in the network. Rather, an | |||
operation control system invoked through a human interface specifies | operation control system invoked through a human interface specifies | |||
the required traffic specification and the end nodes (in terms of | the required traffic specification and the end nodes (in terms of | |||
latency and reliability). Based on this information, the PCE must | latency and reliability). Based on this information, the PCE must | |||
compute a path between the end nodes and provision the network with | compute a path between the end nodes and provision the network with | |||
per-flow state that describes the per-hop operation for a given | per-flow state that describes the per-hop operation for a given | |||
skipping to change at page 48, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 48, line 17 ¶ | |||
For instance, it is possible that a mapping entity on the backbone | For instance, it is possible that a mapping entity on the backbone | |||
transforms a non-CoAP protocol such as PCEP into the RESTful | transforms a non-CoAP protocol such as PCEP into the RESTful | |||
interfaces that the 6TiSCH devices support. This architecture will | interfaces that the 6TiSCH devices support. This architecture will | |||
be refined to comply with DetNet [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] when | be refined to comply with DetNet [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] when | |||
the work is formalized. Related information about 6TiSCH can be | the work is formalized. Related information about 6TiSCH can be | |||
found at [I-D.ietf-6tisch-6top-interface] and RPL [RFC6550]. | found at [I-D.ietf-6tisch-6top-interface] and RPL [RFC6550]. | |||
A protocol may be used to update the state in the devices during | A protocol may be used to update the state in the devices during | |||
runtime, for example if it appears that a path through the network | runtime, for example if it appears that a path through the network | |||
has ceased to perform as expected, but in 6TiSCH that flow was not | has ceased to perform as expected, but in 6TiSCH that flow was not | |||
designed and no protocol was selected. We would like to see DetNet | designed and no protocol was selected. DetNet should define the | |||
define the appropriate end-to-end protocols to be used in that case. | appropriate end-to-end protocols to be used in that case. The | |||
The implication is that these state updates take place once the | implication is that these state updates take place once the system is | |||
system is configured and running, i.e. they are not limited to the | configured and running, i.e. they are not limited to the initial | |||
initial communication of the configuration of the system. | communication of the configuration of the system. | |||
A "slotFrame" is the base object that a PCE would manipulate to | A "slotFrame" is the base object that a PCE would manipulate to | |||
program a schedule into an LLN node ([I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture]). | program a schedule into an LLN node ([I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture]). | |||
We would like to see the PCE read energy data from devices, and | The PCE should read energy data from devices and compute paths that | |||
compute paths that will implement policies on how energy in devices | will implement policies on how energy in devices is consumed, for | |||
is consumed, for instance to ensure that the spent energy does not | instance to ensure that the spent energy does not exceeded the | |||
exceeded the available energy over a period of time. Note: this | available energy over a period of time. Note: this statement implies | |||
statement implies that an extensible protocol for communicating | that an extensible protocol for communicating device info to the PCE | |||
device info to the PCE and enabling the PCE to act on it will be part | and enabling the PCE to act on it will be part of the DetNet | |||
of the DetNet architecture, however for subnets with specific | architecture, however for subnets with specific protocols (e.g. | |||
protocols (e.g. CoAP) a gateway may be required. | CoAP) a gateway may be required. | |||
6TiSCH devices can discover their neighbors over the radio using a | 6TiSCH devices can discover their neighbors over the radio using a | |||
mechanism such as beacons, but even though the neighbor information | mechanism such as beacons, but even though the neighbor information | |||
is available in the 6TiSCH interface data model, 6TiSCH does not | is available in the 6TiSCH interface data model, 6TiSCH does not | |||
describe a protocol to proactively push the neighborhood information | describe a protocol to proactively push the neighborhood information | |||
to a PCE. We would like to see DetNet define such a protocol; one | to a PCE. DetNet should define such a protocol; one possible design | |||
possible design alternative is that it could operate over CoAP, | alternative is that it could operate over CoAP, alternatively it | |||
alternatively it could be converted to/from CoAP by a gateway. We | could be converted to/from CoAP by a gateway. Such a protocol could | |||
would like to see such a protocol carry multiple metrics, for example | carry multiple metrics, for example similar to those used for RPL | |||
similar to those used for RPL operations [RFC6551] | operations [RFC6551] | |||
5.3.2.2. 6TiSCH IP Interface | 5.3.2.2. 6TiSCH IP Interface | |||
"6top" ([I-D.wang-6tisch-6top-sublayer]) is a logical link control | "6top" ([I-D.wang-6tisch-6top-sublayer]) is a logical link control | |||
sitting between the IP layer and the TSCH MAC layer which provides | sitting between the IP layer and the TSCH MAC layer which provides | |||
the link abstraction that is required for IP operations. The 6top | the link abstraction that is required for IP operations. The 6top | |||
data model and management interfaces are further discussed in | data model and management interfaces are further discussed in | |||
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-6top-interface] and [I-D.ietf-6tisch-coap]. | [I-D.ietf-6tisch-6top-interface] and [I-D.ietf-6tisch-coap]. | |||
An IP packet that is sent along a 6TiSCH path uses the Differentiated | An IP packet that is sent along a 6TiSCH path uses the Differentiated | |||
skipping to change at page 56, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at page 56, line 30 ¶ | |||
o All forms of xHaul networks will need some form of DetNet | o All forms of xHaul networks will need some form of DetNet | |||
solutions. For example with the advent of 5G some Backhaul | solutions. For example with the advent of 5G some Backhaul | |||
traffic will also have DetNet requirements, for example traffic | traffic will also have DetNet requirements, for example traffic | |||
belonging to time-critical 5G applications. | belonging to time-critical 5G applications. | |||
o Different splits of the functionality run on the base stations and | o Different splits of the functionality run on the base stations and | |||
the on-site units could co-exist on the same Fronthaul and | the on-site units could co-exist on the same Fronthaul and | |||
Backhaul network. | Backhaul network. | |||
We would like to see the following in future Cellular Radio networks: | Future Cellular Radio networks should contain the following: | |||
o Unified standards-based transport protocols and standard | o Unified standards-based transport protocols and standard | |||
networking equipment that can make use of underlying deterministic | networking equipment that can make use of underlying deterministic | |||
link-layer services | link-layer services | |||
o Unified and standards-based network management systems and | o Unified and standards-based network management systems and | |||
protocols in all parts of the network (including Fronthaul) | protocols in all parts of the network (including Fronthaul) | |||
New radio access network deployment models and architectures may | New radio access network deployment models and architectures may | |||
require time- sensitive networking services with strict requirements | require time- sensitive networking services with strict requirements | |||
skipping to change at page 59, line 16 ¶ | skipping to change at page 59, line 16 ¶ | |||
networking environment | networking environment | |||
o Aware of underlying deterministic networking services (e.g., on | o Aware of underlying deterministic networking services (e.g., on | |||
the Ethernet layer) | the Ethernet layer) | |||
7. Industrial M2M | 7. Industrial M2M | |||
7.1. Use Case Description | 7.1. Use Case Description | |||
Industrial Automation in general refers to automation of | Industrial Automation in general refers to automation of | |||
manufacturing, quality control and material processing. In this | manufacturing, quality control and material processing. This | |||
"machine to machine" (M2M) use case we consider machine units in a | "machine to machine" (M2M) use case considers machine units in a | |||
plant floor which periodically exchange data with upstream or | plant floor which periodically exchange data with upstream or | |||
downstream machine modules and/or a supervisory controller within a | downstream machine modules and/or a supervisory controller within a | |||
local area network. | local area network. | |||
The actors of M2M communication are Programmable Logic Controllers | The actors of M2M communication are Programmable Logic Controllers | |||
(PLCs). Communication between PLCs and between PLCs and the | (PLCs). Communication between PLCs and between PLCs and the | |||
supervisory PLC (S-PLC) is achieved via critical control/data streams | supervisory PLC (S-PLC) is achieved via critical control/data streams | |||
Figure 11. | Figure 11. | |||
S (Sensor) | S (Sensor) | |||
skipping to change at page 61, line 26 ¶ | skipping to change at page 61, line 26 ¶ | |||
Most PLC control loops are rather tolerant of packet loss, however | Most PLC control loops are rather tolerant of packet loss, however | |||
critical control/data streams accept no more than 1 packet loss per | critical control/data streams accept no more than 1 packet loss per | |||
consecutive communication cycle (i.e. if a packet gets lost in cycle | consecutive communication cycle (i.e. if a packet gets lost in cycle | |||
"n", then the next cycle ("n+1") must be lossless). After two or | "n", then the next cycle ("n+1") must be lossless). After two or | |||
more consecutive packet losses the network may be considered to be | more consecutive packet losses the network may be considered to be | |||
"down" by the Application. | "down" by the Application. | |||
As network downtime may impact the whole production system the | As network downtime may impact the whole production system the | |||
required network availability is rather high (99,999%). | required network availability is rather high (99,999%). | |||
Based on the above parameters we expect that some form of redundancy | Based on the above parameters some form of redundancy will be | |||
will be required for M2M communications, however any individual | required for M2M communications, however any individual solution | |||
solution depends on several parameters including cycle time, delivery | depends on several parameters including cycle time, delivery time, | |||
time, etc. | etc. | |||
7.2.2. Stream Creation and Destruction | 7.2.2. Stream Creation and Destruction | |||
In an industrial environment, critical control/data streams are | In an industrial environment, critical control/data streams are | |||
created rather infrequently, on the order of ~10 times per day / week | created rather infrequently, on the order of ~10 times per day / week | |||
/ month. Most of these critical control/data streams get created at | / month. Most of these critical control/data streams get created at | |||
machine startup, however flexibility is also needed during runtime, | machine startup, however flexibility is also needed during runtime, | |||
for example when adding or removing a machine. Going forward as | for example when adding or removing a machine. Going forward as | |||
production systems become more flexible, we expect a significant | production systems become more flexible, there will be a significant | |||
increase in the rate at which streams are created, changed and | increase in the rate at which streams are created, changed and | |||
destroyed. | destroyed. | |||
7.3. Industrial M2M Future | 7.3. Industrial M2M Future | |||
We would like to see a converged IP-standards-based network with | A converged IP-standards-based network with deterministic properties | |||
deterministic properties that can satisfy the timing, security and | that can satisfy the timing, security and reliability constraints | |||
reliability constraints described above. Today's proprietary | described above. Today's proprietary networks could then be | |||
networks could then be interfaced to such a network via gateways or, | interfaced to such a network via gateways or, in the case of new | |||
in the case of new installations, devices could be connected directly | installations, devices could be connected directly to the converged | |||
to the converged network. | network. | |||
For this use case we expect time synchronization accuracy on the | For this use case time synchronization accuracy on the order of 1us | |||
order of 1us. | is expected. | |||
7.4. Industrial M2M Asks | 7.4. Industrial M2M Asks | |||
o Converged IP-based network | o Converged IP-based network | |||
o Deterministic behavior (bounded latency and jitter ) | o Deterministic behavior (bounded latency and jitter ) | |||
o High availability (presumably through redundancy) (99.999 %) | o High availability (presumably through redundancy) (99.999 %) | |||
o Low message delivery time (100us - 50ms) | o Low message delivery time (100us - 50ms) | |||
skipping to change at page 67, line 50 ¶ | skipping to change at page 67, line 50 ¶ | |||
techniques used today, which share a physical network among users, do | techniques used today, which share a physical network among users, do | |||
not offer this level of isolation. DetNet can supply point-to-point | not offer this level of isolation. DetNet can supply point-to-point | |||
or point-to-multipoint paths that offer bandwidth and latency | or point-to-multipoint paths that offer bandwidth and latency | |||
guarantees to a user that cannot be affected by other users' data | guarantees to a user that cannot be affected by other users' data | |||
traffic. Thus DetNet is a powerful tool when latency and reliability | traffic. Thus DetNet is a powerful tool when latency and reliability | |||
are required in Network Slicing. | are required in Network Slicing. | |||
10.2.2. Deterministic Services Within Slices | 10.2.2. Deterministic Services Within Slices | |||
Slices may need to provide services with DetNet-type performance | Slices may need to provide services with DetNet-type performance | |||
guarantees, however we note that a system can be implemented to | guarantees, however note that a system can be implemented to provide | |||
provide such services in more than one way. For example the slice | such services in more than one way. For example the slice itself | |||
itself might be implemented using DetNet, and thus the slice can | might be implemented using DetNet, and thus the slice can provide | |||
provide service guarantees and isolation to its users without any | service guarantees and isolation to its users without any particular | |||
particular DetNet awareness on the part of the users' applications. | DetNet awareness on the part of the users' applications. | |||
Alternatively, a "non-DetNet-aware" slice may host an application | Alternatively, a "non-DetNet-aware" slice may host an application | |||
that itself implements DetNet services and thus can enjoy similar | that itself implements DetNet services and thus can enjoy similar | |||
service guarantees. | service guarantees. | |||
10.3. A Network Slicing Use Case Example - 5G Bearer Network | 10.3. A Network Slicing Use Case Example - 5G Bearer Network | |||
Network Slicing is a core feature of 5G defined in 3GPP, which is | Network Slicing is a core feature of 5G defined in 3GPP, which is | |||
currently under development. A network slice in a mobile network is | currently under development. A network slice in a mobile network is | |||
a complete logical network including Radio Access Network (RAN) and | a complete logical network including Radio Access Network (RAN) and | |||
Core Network (CN). It provides telecommunication services and | Core Network (CN). It provides telecommunication services and | |||
skipping to change at page 71, line 42 ¶ | skipping to change at page 71, line 42 ¶ | |||
11.2. Scalable Size | 11.2. Scalable Size | |||
DetNet networks range in size from very small, e.g. inside a single | DetNet networks range in size from very small, e.g. inside a single | |||
industrial machine, to very large, for example a Utility Grid network | industrial machine, to very large, for example a Utility Grid network | |||
spanning a whole country, and involving many "hops" over various | spanning a whole country, and involving many "hops" over various | |||
kinds of links for example radio repeaters, microwave linkes, fiber | kinds of links for example radio repeaters, microwave linkes, fiber | |||
optic links, etc.. However recall that the scope of DetNet is | optic links, etc.. However recall that the scope of DetNet is | |||
confined to networks that are centrally administered, and explicitly | confined to networks that are centrally administered, and explicitly | |||
excludes unbounded decentralized networks such as the Internet. | excludes unbounded decentralized networks such as the Internet. | |||
11.2.1. Scalable Number of Flows | ||||
The number of flows in a given network application can potentially be | ||||
large, and can potentially grow faster than the number of nodes and | ||||
hops. So the network should provide a sufficient (perhaps | ||||
configurable) maximum number of flows for any given application. | ||||
11.3. Scalable Timing Parameters and Accuracy | 11.3. Scalable Timing Parameters and Accuracy | |||
11.3.1. Bounded Latency | 11.3.1. Bounded Latency | |||
The DetNet Data Flow Information Model is expected to provide means | The DetNet Data Flow Information Model is expected to provide means | |||
to configure the network that include parameters for querying network | to configure the network that include parameters for querying network | |||
path latency, requesting bounded latency for a given stream, | path latency, requesting bounded latency for a given stream, | |||
requesting worst case maximum and/or minimum latency for a given path | requesting worst case maximum and/or minimum latency for a given path | |||
or stream, and so on. It is an expected case that the network may | or stream, and so on. It is an expected case that the network may | |||
not be able to provide a given requested service level, and if so the | not be able to provide a given requested service level, and if so the | |||
skipping to change at page 72, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 72, line 30 ¶ | |||
Applications may require "extremely low latency" however depending on | Applications may require "extremely low latency" however depending on | |||
the application these may mean very different latency values; for | the application these may mean very different latency values; for | |||
example "low latency" across a Utility grid network is on a different | example "low latency" across a Utility grid network is on a different | |||
time scale than "low latency" in a motor control loop in a small | time scale than "low latency" in a motor control loop in a small | |||
machine. The intent is that the mechanisms for specifying desired | machine. The intent is that the mechanisms for specifying desired | |||
latency include wide ranges, and that architecturally there is | latency include wide ranges, and that architecturally there is | |||
nothing to prevent arbirtrarily low latencies from being implemented | nothing to prevent arbirtrarily low latencies from being implemented | |||
in a given network. | in a given network. | |||
11.3.3. Symmetrical Path Delays | 11.3.3. Bounded Jitter (Latency Variation) | |||
As with the other Latency-related elements noted above, parameters | ||||
should be available to determine or request the allowed variation in | ||||
latency. | ||||
11.3.4. Symmetrical Path Delays | ||||
Some applications would like to specify that the transit delay time | Some applications would like to specify that the transit delay time | |||
values be equal for both the transmit and return paths. | values be equal for both the transmit and return paths. | |||
11.4. High Reliability and Availability | 11.4. High Reliability and Availability | |||
Reliablity is of critical importance to many DetNet applications, in | Reliablity is of critical importance to many DetNet applications, in | |||
which consequences of failure can be extraordinarily high in terms of | which consequences of failure can be extraordinarily high in terms of | |||
cost and even human life. DetNet based systems are expected to be | cost and even human life. DetNet based systems are expected to be | |||
implemented with essentially arbitrarily high availability (for | implemented with essentially arbitrarily high availability (for | |||
skipping to change at page 74, line 43 ¶ | skipping to change at page 75, line 12 ¶ | |||
latency is critical to interacting with the virtual world because | latency is critical to interacting with the virtual world because | |||
perceptual delays can cause motion sickness. | perceptual delays can cause motion sickness. | |||
12.2.2. Internet-Based Applications Today | 12.2.2. Internet-Based Applications Today | |||
Internet service today is by definition "best effort", with no | Internet service today is by definition "best effort", with no | |||
guarantees on delivery or bandwidth. | guarantees on delivery or bandwidth. | |||
12.2.3. Internet-Based Applications Future | 12.2.3. Internet-Based Applications Future | |||
We imagine an Internet from which we will be able to play a video | An Internet from which one can play a video without glitches and play | |||
without glitches and play games without lag. | games without lag. | |||
For online gaming, the maximum round-trip delay can be 100ms and | For online gaming, the maximum round-trip delay can be 100ms and | |||
stricter for FPS gaming which can be 10-50ms. Transport delay is the | stricter for FPS gaming which can be 10-50ms. Transport delay is the | |||
dominate part with a 5-20ms budget. | dominate part with a 5-20ms budget. | |||
For VR, 1-10ms maximum delay is needed and total network budget is | For VR, 1-10ms maximum delay is needed and total network budget is | |||
1-5ms if doing remote VR. | 1-5ms if doing remote VR. | |||
Flow identification can be used for gaming and VR, i.e. it can | Flow identification can be used for gaming and VR, i.e. it can | |||
recognize a critical flow and provide appropriate latency bounds. | recognize a critical flow and provide appropriate latency bounds. | |||
skipping to change at page 76, line 13 ¶ | skipping to change at page 76, line 30 ¶ | |||
with the core goal of achieving the lowest possible latency. | with the core goal of achieving the lowest possible latency. | |||
For transmitting streams that require more bandwidth than a single | For transmitting streams that require more bandwidth than a single | |||
link in the target network can support, link aggregation is a | link in the target network can support, link aggregation is a | |||
technique for combining (aggregating) the bandwidth available on | technique for combining (aggregating) the bandwidth available on | |||
multiple physical links to create a single logical link of the | multiple physical links to create a single logical link of the | |||
required bandwidth. However, if aggregation is to be used, the | required bandwidth. However, if aggregation is to be used, the | |||
network controller (or equivalent) must be able to determine the | network controller (or equivalent) must be able to determine the | |||
maximum latency of any path through the aggregate link. | maximum latency of any path through the aggregate link. | |||
13. Contributors | 12.5. Pro Audio and Video - Deterministic Time to Establish Streaming | |||
The DetNet Working Group has decided that guidelines for establishing | ||||
a deterministic time to establish stream startup are not within scope | ||||
of DetNet. If bounded timing of establishing or re-establish streams | ||||
is required in a given use case, it is up to the application/system | ||||
to achieve this. | ||||
13. Security Considerations | ||||
This document covers a number of representative applications and | ||||
network scenarios that are expected to make use of DetNet | ||||
technologies. Each of the potential DetNet uses cases will have | ||||
security considerations from both the use-specific and DetNet | ||||
technology perspectives. While some use-specific security | ||||
considerations are discussed above, a more comprehensive discussion | ||||
of such considerations is captured in DetNet Security Considerations | ||||
[I-D.ietf-detnet-security]. Readers are encouraged to review this | ||||
document to gain a more complete understanding of DetNet related | ||||
security considerations. | ||||
14. Contributors | ||||
RFC7322 limits the number of authors listed on the front page of a | RFC7322 limits the number of authors listed on the front page of a | |||
draft to a maximum of 5, far fewer than the 20 individuals below who | draft to a maximum of 5, far fewer than the 20 individuals below who | |||
made important contributions to this draft. The editor wishes to | made important contributions to this draft. The editor wishes to | |||
thank and acknowledge each of the following authors for contributing | thank and acknowledge each of the following authors for contributing | |||
text to this draft. See also Section 14. | text to this draft. See also Section 15. | |||
Craig Gunther (Harman International) | Craig Gunther (Harman International) | |||
10653 South River Front Parkway, South Jordan,UT 84095 | 10653 South River Front Parkway, South Jordan,UT 84095 | |||
phone +1 801 568-7675, email craig.gunther@harman.com | phone +1 801 568-7675, email craig.gunther@harman.com | |||
Pascal Thubert (Cisco Systems, Inc) | Pascal Thubert (Cisco Systems, Inc) | |||
Building D, 45 Allee des Ormes - BP1200, MOUGINS | Building D, 45 Allee des Ormes - BP1200, MOUGINS | |||
Sophia Antipolis 06254 FRANCE | Sophia Antipolis 06254 FRANCE | |||
phone +33 497 23 26 34, email pthubert@cisco.com | phone +33 497 23 26 34, email pthubert@cisco.com | |||
skipping to change at page 77, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at page 78, line 37 ¶ | |||
Xuesong Geng (Huawei Technologies) | Xuesong Geng (Huawei Technologies) | |||
email gengxuesong@huawei.com | email gengxuesong@huawei.com | |||
Diego Dujovne (Universidad Diego Portales) | Diego Dujovne (Universidad Diego Portales) | |||
email diego.dujovne@mail.udp.cl | email diego.dujovne@mail.udp.cl | |||
Maik Seewald (Cisco Systems) | Maik Seewald (Cisco Systems) | |||
email maseewal@cisco.com | email maseewal@cisco.com | |||
14. Acknowledgments | 15. Acknowledgments | |||
14.1. Pro Audio | 15.1. Pro Audio | |||
This section was derived from draft-gunther-detnet-proaudio-req-01. | This section was derived from draft-gunther-detnet-proaudio-req-01. | |||
The editors would like to acknowledge the help of the following | The editors would like to acknowledge the help of the following | |||
individuals and the companies they represent: | individuals and the companies they represent: | |||
Jeff Koftinoff, Meyer Sound | Jeff Koftinoff, Meyer Sound | |||
Jouni Korhonen, Associate Technical Director, Broadcom | Jouni Korhonen, Associate Technical Director, Broadcom | |||
skipping to change at page 78, line 13 ¶ | skipping to change at page 79, line 4 ¶ | |||
This section was derived from draft-gunther-detnet-proaudio-req-01. | This section was derived from draft-gunther-detnet-proaudio-req-01. | |||
The editors would like to acknowledge the help of the following | The editors would like to acknowledge the help of the following | |||
individuals and the companies they represent: | individuals and the companies they represent: | |||
Jeff Koftinoff, Meyer Sound | Jeff Koftinoff, Meyer Sound | |||
Jouni Korhonen, Associate Technical Director, Broadcom | Jouni Korhonen, Associate Technical Director, Broadcom | |||
Pascal Thubert, CTAO, Cisco | Pascal Thubert, CTAO, Cisco | |||
Kieran Tyrrell, Sienda New Media Technologies GmbH | Kieran Tyrrell, Sienda New Media Technologies GmbH | |||
14.2. Utility Telecom | 15.2. Utility Telecom | |||
This section was derived from draft-wetterwald-detnet-utilities-reqs- | This section was derived from draft-wetterwald-detnet-utilities-reqs- | |||
02. | 02. | |||
Faramarz Maghsoodlou, Ph. D. IoT Connected Industries and Energy | Faramarz Maghsoodlou, Ph. D. IoT Connected Industries and Energy | |||
Practice Cisco | Practice Cisco | |||
Pascal Thubert, CTAO Cisco | Pascal Thubert, CTAO Cisco | |||
14.3. Building Automation Systems | The wind power generation use case has been extracted from the study | |||
of Wind Farms conducted within the 5GPPP Virtuwind Project. The | ||||
project is funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and | ||||
innovation programme under grant agreement No 671648 (VirtuWind). | ||||
15.3. Building Automation Systems | ||||
This section was derived from draft-bas-usecase-detnet-00. | This section was derived from draft-bas-usecase-detnet-00. | |||
14.4. Wireless for Industrial | 15.4. Wireless for Industrial | |||
This section was derived from draft-thubert-6tisch-4detnet-01. | This section was derived from draft-thubert-6tisch-4detnet-01. | |||
This specification derives from the 6TiSCH architecture, which is the | This specification derives from the 6TiSCH architecture, which is the | |||
result of multiple interactions, in particular during the 6TiSCH | result of multiple interactions, in particular during the 6TiSCH | |||
(bi)Weekly Interim call, relayed through the 6TiSCH mailing list at | (bi)Weekly Interim call, relayed through the 6TiSCH mailing list at | |||
the IETF. | the IETF. | |||
The authors wish to thank: Kris Pister, Thomas Watteyne, Xavier | The authors wish to thank: Kris Pister, Thomas Watteyne, Xavier | |||
Vilajosana, Qin Wang, Tom Phinney, Robert Assimiti, Michael | Vilajosana, Qin Wang, Tom Phinney, Robert Assimiti, Michael | |||
Richardson, Zhuo Chen, Malisa Vucinic, Alfredo Grieco, Martin Turon, | Richardson, Zhuo Chen, Malisa Vucinic, Alfredo Grieco, Martin Turon, | |||
Dominique Barthel, Elvis Vogli, Guillaume Gaillard, Herman Storey, | Dominique Barthel, Elvis Vogli, Guillaume Gaillard, Herman Storey, | |||
Maria Rita Palattella, Nicola Accettura, Patrick Wetterwald, Pouria | Maria Rita Palattella, Nicola Accettura, Patrick Wetterwald, Pouria | |||
Zand, Raghuram Sudhaakar, and Shitanshu Shah for their participation | Zand, Raghuram Sudhaakar, and Shitanshu Shah for their participation | |||
and various contributions. | and various contributions. | |||
14.5. Cellular Radio | 15.5. Cellular Radio | |||
This section was derived from draft-korhonen-detnet-telreq-00. | This section was derived from draft-korhonen-detnet-telreq-00. | |||
14.6. Industrial M2M | 15.6. Industrial M2M | |||
The authors would like to thank Feng Chen and Marcel Kiessling for | The authors would like to thank Feng Chen and Marcel Kiessling for | |||
their comments and suggestions. | their comments and suggestions. | |||
14.7. Internet Applications and CoMP | 15.7. Internet Applications and CoMP | |||
This section was derived from draft-zha-detnet-use-case-00 by Yiyong | This section was derived from draft-zha-detnet-use-case-00 by Yiyong | |||
Zha. | Zha. | |||
This document has benefited from reviews, suggestions, comments and | This document has benefited from reviews, suggestions, comments and | |||
proposed text provided by the following members, listed in | proposed text provided by the following members, listed in | |||
alphabetical order: Jing Huang, Junru Lin, Lehong Niu and Oilver | alphabetical order: Jing Huang, Junru Lin, Lehong Niu and Oilver | |||
Huang. | Huang. | |||
14.8. Electrical Utilities | 15.8. Network Slicing | |||
The wind power generation use case has been extracted from the study | ||||
of Wind Farms conducted within the 5GPPP Virtuwind Project. The | ||||
project is funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and | ||||
innovation programme under grant agreement No 671648 (VirtuWind). | ||||
14.9. Network Slicing | ||||
This section was written by Xuesong Geng, who would like to | This section was written by Xuesong Geng, who would like to | |||
acknowledge Norm Finn and Mach Chen for their useful comments. | acknowledge Norm Finn and Mach Chen for their useful comments. | |||
14.10. Mining | 15.9. Mining | |||
This section was written by Diego Dujovne in conjunction with Xavier | This section was written by Diego Dujovne in conjunction with Xavier | |||
Vilasojana. | Vilasojana. | |||
14.11. Private Blockchain | 15.10. Private Blockchain | |||
This section was written by Daniel Huang. | This section was written by Daniel Huang. | |||
15. IANA Considerations | 16. IANA Considerations | |||
This memo includes no requests from IANA. | This memo includes no requests from IANA. | |||
16. Informative References | 17. Informative References | |||
[Ahm14] Ahmed, M. and R. Kim, "Communication network architectures | [Ahm14] Ahmed, M. and R. Kim, "Communication network architectures | |||
for smart-wind power farms.", Energies, p. 3900-3921. , | for smart-wind power farms.", Energies, p. 3900-3921. , | |||
June 2014. | June 2014. | |||
[bacnetip] | [bacnetip] | |||
ASHRAE, "Annex J to ANSI/ASHRAE 135-1995 - BACnet/IP", | ASHRAE, "Annex J to ANSI/ASHRAE 135-1995 - BACnet/IP", | |||
January 1999. | January 1999. | |||
[CoMP] NGMN Alliance, "RAN EVOLUTION PROJECT COMP EVALUATION AND | [CoMP] NGMN Alliance, "RAN EVOLUTION PROJECT COMP EVALUATION AND | |||
skipping to change at page 81, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 81, line 49 ¶ | |||
in progress), April 2018. | in progress), April 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-coap] | [I-D.ietf-6tisch-coap] | |||
Sudhaakar, R. and P. Zand, "6TiSCH Resource Management and | Sudhaakar, R. and P. Zand, "6TiSCH Resource Management and | |||
Interaction using CoAP", draft-ietf-6tisch-coap-03 (work | Interaction using CoAP", draft-ietf-6tisch-coap-03 (work | |||
in progress), March 2015. | in progress), March 2015. | |||
[I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] | [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] | |||
Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas, | Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas, | |||
"Deterministic Networking Architecture", draft-ietf- | "Deterministic Networking Architecture", draft-ietf- | |||
detnet-architecture-07 (work in progress), August 2018. | detnet-architecture-08 (work in progress), September 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-detnet-problem-statement] | [I-D.ietf-detnet-problem-statement] | |||
Finn, N. and P. Thubert, "Deterministic Networking Problem | Finn, N. and P. Thubert, "Deterministic Networking Problem | |||
Statement", draft-ietf-detnet-problem-statement-06 (work | Statement", draft-ietf-detnet-problem-statement-07 (work | |||
in progress), July 2018. | in progress), October 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-detnet-security] | ||||
Mizrahi, T., Grossman, E., Hacker, A., Das, S., Dowdell, | ||||
J., Austad, H., Stanton, K., and N. Finn, "Deterministic | ||||
Networking (DetNet) Security Considerations", draft-ietf- | ||||
detnet-security-02 (work in progress), April 2018. | ||||
[I-D.ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls] | [I-D.ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls] | |||
Davari, S., Oren, A., Bhatia, M., Roberts, P., and L. | Davari, S., Oren, A., Bhatia, M., Roberts, P., and L. | |||
Montini, "Transporting Timing messages over MPLS | Montini, "Transporting Timing messages over MPLS | |||
Networks", draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-07 (work in | Networks", draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-07 (work in | |||
progress), October 2015. | progress), October 2015. | |||
[I-D.kh-spring-ip-ran-use-case] | [I-D.kh-spring-ip-ran-use-case] | |||
Khasnabish, B., hu, f., and L. Contreras, "Segment Routing | Khasnabish, B., hu, f., and L. Contreras, "Segment Routing | |||
in IP RAN use case", draft-kh-spring-ip-ran-use-case-02 | in IP RAN use case", draft-kh-spring-ip-ran-use-case-02 | |||
skipping to change at page 85, line 16 ¶ | skipping to change at page 85, line 46 ¶ | |||
P. Pate, "Structure-Aware Time Division Multiplexed (TDM) | P. Pate, "Structure-Aware Time Division Multiplexed (TDM) | |||
Circuit Emulation Service over Packet Switched Network | Circuit Emulation Service over Packet Switched Network | |||
(CESoPSN)", RFC 5086, DOI 10.17487/RFC5086, December 2007, | (CESoPSN)", RFC 5086, DOI 10.17487/RFC5086, December 2007, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5086>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5086>. | |||
[RFC5087] Stein, Y(J)., Shashoua, R., Insler, R., and M. Anavi, | [RFC5087] Stein, Y(J)., Shashoua, R., Insler, R., and M. Anavi, | |||
"Time Division Multiplexing over IP (TDMoIP)", RFC 5087, | "Time Division Multiplexing over IP (TDMoIP)", RFC 5087, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC5087, December 2007, | DOI 10.17487/RFC5087, December 2007, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5087>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5087>. | |||
[RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch, | ||||
"Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms | ||||
Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10.17487/RFC5905, June 2010, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5905>. | ||||
[RFC6550] Winter, T., Ed., Thubert, P., Ed., Brandt, A., Hui, J., | [RFC6550] Winter, T., Ed., Thubert, P., Ed., Brandt, A., Hui, J., | |||
Kelsey, R., Levis, P., Pister, K., Struik, R., Vasseur, | Kelsey, R., Levis, P., Pister, K., Struik, R., Vasseur, | |||
JP., and R. Alexander, "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for | JP., and R. Alexander, "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for | |||
Low-Power and Lossy Networks", RFC 6550, | Low-Power and Lossy Networks", RFC 6550, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC6550, March 2012, | DOI 10.17487/RFC6550, March 2012, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6550>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6550>. | |||
[RFC6551] Vasseur, JP., Ed., Kim, M., Ed., Pister, K., Dejean, N., | [RFC6551] Vasseur, JP., Ed., Kim, M., Ed., Pister, K., Dejean, N., | |||
and D. Barthel, "Routing Metrics Used for Path Calculation | and D. Barthel, "Routing Metrics Used for Path Calculation | |||
in Low-Power and Lossy Networks", RFC 6551, | in Low-Power and Lossy Networks", RFC 6551, | |||
End of changes. 70 change blocks. | ||||
192 lines changed or deleted | 249 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |