* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

Raw Status Pages

Reliable and Available Wireless (Active WG)
Rtg Area: Alvaro Retana, Deborah Brungard, Martin Vigoureux | 2020-Feb-07 —  
Chairs
 
 


IETF-108 raw minutes

Session 2020-07-30 1100-1240: Room 4 - Audio stream - raw chatroom

Minutes

minutes-108-raw-00 minute



          # RAW WG Minutes - IETF 108
          
          Date: Thursday, July 30, 2020
          Time: 11:00-12:40 UTC -- 100mins
          Chairs:
            Rick Taylor
            Eve Schooler
          Responsible AD: Deborah Brungard
          
          Meetecho: http://www.meetecho.com/ietf108/raw
          Live minutes: https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-108-raw
          Jabber: https://www.ietf.org/jabber/logs/raw/2020-07-30.html
          
          Time Zone conversion:
          https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20200730T110000&p1=1240
          
          ## 1) Intro -- 11:00 10 mins
          - Reminder of IPR policies
          
               * Eve presents the note well and suggests all to contribute to the
               minutes with Ethan
          
          - Current drafts
          - Milestones and Charter (Chairs)
               * Rick presents drafts for which adoption was requested
               * Milestones call for horizontal docs independant of technologies
               * Still we have specialization on particular technologies
               * Q: How do we align charter and the personal drafts ?
               *
               * Rick: Changing charter not considered a good idea, changing
               milestones OK.
               * Pascal: LT1 working on abstract compression mechanism. Produced
               info doc on technologies considered to find common abstraction
               on which to base design. Can't work without knowledge of
               technologies. Need baseline of underlying tech. So we need this
               milestone.
               * Eve: Chairs agree with you.
               In parallel not to stop anything in RAW.
               * Eve: Also overlap of authors between the two groups' OAM drafts.
               * Rick: Regarding OAM: Generic in DetNet, RAW specific.
               * Pascal: Was in DetNet since start. DetNet OAM is actually a subset
               of RAW OAM req'ts. So should keep separate OAM docs and eventually
               merge. Too difficult to have all potentially common things approved
               by DetNet.
               * Lou: Discussed on Monday in DetNet, general agreement in meeting:
               Generic portion of OAM which is common (to both DetNet and RAW)
               would proceed in DetNet, RAW specific OAM consideration should
               progress in RAW. To be clear, there was no intent to limit RAW
               specific discussions in RAW.
               * Rick: Intent is to split docs and work in parallel. Need to to
               take to list.
               * Rick: Authors of LDACS and 5G, the tech vertical drafts - do we
               ask them to contribute tech-agnostic components of those to Pascal
               Tech draft?
                   * LDACS is already included in Pascal's technology draft in
                   Section 7
               * Janos: 5G already moving to RAW technologies draft, as well
               * Pascal: For Technologies doc we are asking to provide specific
               format so that we can derive a generic format common to all. Not
               trying to be exhaustive on each. So individual drafts are free form -
               but the tech draft is different.
               * Rick: Need to continue in WG.
               * Eve: Out of time need to move on.
          
          ## 2) Use cases -- 11:10 ->10 mins
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bernardos-raw-use-cases-04
          - (Carlos Bernardos)
          
              * Carlos presents use cases
              * Rick: Draft was adopted and not affected by reorg so please rename
              (to draft-ietf-raw-use-cases-00, implicitly)
          
          ## 3) 802.11 update on TSN and Localization -- 11:20 ->20 mins
          - (Dave Cavalcanti and Ganesh Venkatesan)
          
               * Dave: new opportunities in automation where Wi-Fi does not
               lay today
               * Documented use cases and requirements; relates to use cases in RAW
               * 802.11ax enables 802.1Qbv with scheduling capabilities and OFDMA
               blocks (RU)
               * Also 6MHz band in US and in process for many countries
               * Intro to Wi-Fi 7 (.11be)
               * Lou: With WiFi7, How is QoS provisioned and/or controlled?
               * Dave: Updates in WF7 include a way for stations to negotiate
               QoS and do admission control based on that. Low latency and high
               rel also negotiated. New signalling for that. New enhancments to
               channel access (admission control). Time aware scheduling.
               * Eduard Vasilenko: 1/2 or 1/3 ms were shown. Want 5ms latency. In
               3gpp have budget due to long fiber, hundreds of km. Could be in
               diff't cities. But in these applications distance is typically
               less than 20km. Note that speed of light in fiber is 5ms/km. So
               is designed for local communication, no budget for long distance
               for fiber.
               * Dave: Latency can be few hundred usec, mostly based on user
               requirements targeting end to end with these low values.
               * Rick: Please continue on list.
               * Rick: You have presented a number of IEEE use case analyses -
               can we make sure these use cases are integrated into RAW use cases?
               * Dave: Yes some are already included, some in progress.
          
          ## 4) LDACS -- 11:40 ->10 mins
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-maeurer-raw-ldacs-04
          - (Nils Maeurer)
          
               * Nils presents the LDACS technology
               * Rick: Question for authors: Are you asking for WG adoption?
               * Nils: Yes.
               * Rick: OK we will make that request on the list.
          
          ## 5) Architecture and Technologies -- 11:50 ->25 mins
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pthubert-raw-architecture-04
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thubert-raw-technologies-05
          - (Pascal Thubert)
          
               * Technologies doc:
               * Rick: Will ask for WG adoption on list. Addresses concerns about
               (too) many specific tech docs - should update WG goals to include
               this work.
               * Architecture doc:
               * Greg Mirsky: Out of band OAM: counter collector or telemetry
               collector? Or active OAM packets? BFD?
               * Pascal: Yes both. If OAM packet from out to in (right to left)
               flood collector. Captures all measurements along the way, aggregate,
               send to source. BFD is one way to do this. To see transmission
               quality from ingress to egress, use BFD. Not a serial path, doing
               this graph, to be defined. Observe one track vs whole system.
               * Greg: Do you consider BFD in or out of band?
               * Pascal: Out of band. A sort of ping.
               * Greg: If out of band doesn't reflect experience of traffic?
               * Pascal: Importance is that OAM can piggy back with data packet,
               or separate, which doesn't experience flow, but collects the
               measurements along the way. Packet treatment is not the flow. Need
               to discuss on list. Multiple flows can be treated the same way.
               * Rick: this is a general OAM question - need to look at what other
               groups are doing with OAM.
               * Lou: From the discussion at the BOF and at time of chartering,
               my understanding is that RAW provides adaptation from general
               DetNet to wireless subnet technologies. But picture implies whole
               world is RAW. Slide 7/8. Would like to see context with DetNet in
               Architecture doc.
               * Pascal: We're not inside DetNet anymore.
               * Lou: Need to make sure WG is aligned (on that notion). Please
               address prior session comments in future versions. (not said at
               mic, from jabber: document should also cover how do you see raw
               working with the capabilities of the radio network, e.g., the new
               wifi capabilities described earlier in the session - with their
               own version of PAREO?)
               * (Last slide)
               * Pascal: Apologies, but comments made in BOF were not fully
               captured;  I attempted to address everything on list. Need to
               request repeat of outstanding comments.
          
          ## 6) OAM -- 12:15 ->15 mins
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-theoleyre-raw-oam-support-03
          - (Fabrice Theoleyre)
          
               * Pascal: Need to sync with DetNet docs. Pointers hard to read,
               maybe bring in content to be more self-sufficient.
               * Rick: Re OAM split between generic OAM vs RAW or DetNet
               specific. Proposal is to keep this doc for RAW specific. Should
               have normative reference to DetNet version to keep
               * Lou: Implicit in Pascal's comment: Scope of RAW: Is it superset
               or subset of DetNet. Really need to agree on this.
               * Rick: We have been asked by ADs to keep RAW under current charter
               as short and focused as possible, to achieve near term results, thus
               must limit scope. So it is strictly wireless subset of DetNet. But
               after that work is completed, could recharter to do more work. Could
               continue discussion on list.
               * Pascal: Was initially like that but with multi-access, care about
               wireless part. Get info from destination, across non-deterministic
               link. If out of scope for DetNet, then need to decide if this is
               in scope for RAW.
               * Lou: (from jabber) it is in scope IMO
               * Deborah Brungard: Need to address gaps in DetNet that would need
               to be addressed in RAW.
          
          ## 7) Discussion -- 12:30 ->10 mins
          
          - (Out of time, session concluded. Please use mailing list. Good since
          archived to record debate as well as decision, helpful for future
          implementers.)
               * Eve: We now have 4 docs to be approved, others to be taken to list.
               * Pascal: When upload minutes, can provide link to codimd, or  save
               as .md file but mime type used to upload was different so tool would
               reject it. Can save HTML from codimd, and uploading that worked.
               * Rick: Pascal are you asking for adoption for this draft?
               * Lots of great content in there, may become one or more docs. Has
               value for working group.
               * Lou: Need to define scope you are trying to solve before you
               adopt Architecture draft. As wireless people assumption that world
               is wireless, but that isn't always the perspective. E.g. for PREOF,
               where do you need your own version rather than useing existing.
               * Rick: Raw developed thoughts about end to end path metrics are
               used for availability, can I even send the data?
               * Lou: Are reliability and availability not pretty much the same,
               about delivering packets?
               * Pascal: Most of wireless is not mesh, so if just focus on that
               isn't so useful. But wifi, 5g, want to know which to use to save
               energy, money.
               * Lou: From abstract case that is similar to wired case, two paths
               with different cost. Why is that different for RAW? Wireless is a
               subset of that discussion?
               * Rick: Becomes an issue due to frequency of changes of path
               conditions. DetNet is mostly about wired.
               * Lou: No we started out with consideration of wireless. Supported
               RAW formation to put more attention on wireless.
               * Pascal: Picture is a generalization of problem that should be
               within scope of DetNet
               * Deborah on Jabber: It's not what DetNet covers it is what are
               the gaps for wireless. Focus on not boiling ocean.
               * Lou: Consistent with that, there are things consistent with DetNet
               that are specific to wireless.
          
          



Generated from PyHt script /wg/raw/minutes.pyht Latest update: 24 Oct 2012 16:51 GMT -