rfc8655xml2.original.xml | rfc8655.xml | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?> | <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?> | |||
<!-- This template is for creating an Internet Draft using xml2rfc, | <rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" version="3" category="std" conse | |||
which is available here: http://xml.resource.org. --> | nsus="true" docName="draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-13" indexInclude="true" ipr= | |||
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [ | "trust200902" number="8655" prepTime="2019-10-11T11:14:10" scripts="Common,Latin | |||
]> | " sortRefs="true" submissionType="IETF" symRefs="true" tocDepth="3" tocInclude=" | |||
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?> | true" xml:lang="en"> | |||
<link href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-13 | ||||
<rfc category="std" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-13 | " rel="prev"/> | |||
"> | <link href="https://dx.doi.org/10.17487/rfc8655" rel="alternate"/> | |||
<link href="urn:issn:2070-1721" rel="alternate"/> | ||||
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?> | ||||
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?> | ||||
<?rfc iprnotified-"no" ?> | ||||
<?rfc authorship="yes"?> | ||||
<?rfc tocappendix="yes"?> | ||||
<?rfc strict="yes" ?> | ||||
<!-- give errors regarding ID-nits and DTD validation --> | ||||
<!-- control the table of contents (ToC) --> | ||||
<?rfc toc="yes"?> | ||||
<!-- generate a ToC --> | ||||
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?> | ||||
<!-- the number of levels of subsections in ToC. default: 3 --> | ||||
<!-- control references --> | ||||
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?> | ||||
<!-- use symbolic references tags, i.e, [RFC2119] instead of [1] --> | ||||
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?> | ||||
<!-- sort the reference entries alphabetically --> | ||||
<!-- control vertical white space | ||||
(using these PIs as follows is recommended by the RFC Editor) --> | ||||
<?rfc compact="no" ?> | ||||
<front> | <front> | |||
<title>Deterministic Networking Architecture</title> | <title>Deterministic Networking Architecture</title> | |||
<author initials="N" surname="Finn" fullname="Norman Finn" > | <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8655" stream="IETF"/> | |||
<organization> | <author initials="N" surname="Finn" fullname="Norman Finn"> | |||
Huawei | <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Huawei</organization> | |||
</organization> | <address> | |||
<address> | <postal> | |||
<postal> | <street>3101 Rio Way</street> | |||
<street>3101 Rio Way</street> | <city>Spring Valley</city> | |||
<city>Spring Valley</city> | <region>California</region> | |||
<region>California</region> | <code>91977</code> | |||
<code>91977</code> | <country>United States of America</country> | |||
<country>US</country> | </postal> | |||
</postal> | <phone>+1 925 980 6430</phone> | |||
<phone>+1 925 980 6430</phone> | <email>nfinn@nfinnconsulting.com</email> | |||
<email>norman.finn@mail01.huawei.com</email> | </address> | |||
</address> | </author> | |||
</author> | <author initials="P" surname="Thubert" fullname="Pascal Thubert"> | |||
<author initials="P" surname="Thubert" fullname="Pascal Thubert"> | <organization abbrev="Cisco" showOnFrontPage="true"> | |||
<organization abbrev="Cisco"> | ||||
Cisco Systems | Cisco Systems | |||
</organization> | </organization> | |||
<address> | <address> | |||
<postal> | <postal> | |||
<street>Village d'Entreprises Green Side</street> | <street>Village d'Entreprises Green Side</street> | |||
<street>400, Avenue de Roumanille</street> | <street>400, Avenue de Roumanille</street> | |||
<street>Batiment T3</street> | <street> Batiment T3</street> | |||
<city>Biot - Sophia Antipolis</city> | <city>Biot - Sophia Antipolis</city> | |||
<code>06410</code> | <code>06410</code> | |||
<country>FRANCE</country> | <country>France</country> | |||
</postal> | </postal> | |||
<phone>+33 4 97 23 26 34</phone> | <phone>+33 4 97 23 26 34</phone> | |||
<email>pthubert@cisco.com</email> | <email>pthubert@cisco.com</email> | |||
</address> | </address> | |||
</author> | </author> | |||
<author fullname="Balázs Varga" initials="B." surname="Varga"> | <author fullname="Balázs Varga" initials="B." surname="Varga"> | |||
<organization>Ericsson</organization> | <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Ericsson</organization> | |||
<address> | <address> | |||
<postal> | <postal> | |||
<street>Magyar tudosok korutja 11</street> | <street>Magyar tudosok korutja 11</street> | |||
<city>Budapest</city> | <city>Budapest</city> | |||
<country>Hungary</country> | <country>Hungary</country> | |||
<code>1117</code> | <code>1117</code> | |||
</postal> | </postal> | |||
<email>balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com</email> | <email>balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com</email> | |||
</address> | </address> | |||
</author> | </author> | |||
<author fullname="János Farkas" initials="J." surname="Farkas"> | <author fullname="János Farkas" initials="J." surname="Farkas"> | |||
<organization>Ericsson</organization> | <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Ericsson</organization> | |||
<address> | <address> | |||
<postal> | <postal> | |||
<street>Magyar tudosok korutja 11</street> | <street>Magyar tudosok korutja 11</street> | |||
<city>Budapest</city> | <city>Budapest</city> | |||
<country>Hungary</country> | <country>Hungary</country> | |||
<code>1117</code> | <code>1117</code> | |||
</postal> | </postal> | |||
<email>janos.farkas@ericsson.com</email> | <email>janos.farkas@ericsson.com</email> | |||
</address> | </address> | |||
</author> | </author> | |||
<date/> | <date month="10" year="2019"/> | |||
<area>Internet</area> | ||||
<area>Internet</area> | <workgroup>DetNet</workgroup> | |||
<keyword>TSN, Bounded Lantency, Reliable Networking, Available Networking</k | ||||
<workgroup>DetNet</workgroup> | eyword> | |||
<abstract pn="section-abstract"> | ||||
<abstract> | <t pn="section-abstract-1"> | |||
<t> | ||||
This document provides the overall architecture for | This document provides the overall architecture for | |||
Deterministic Networking (DetNet), which | Deterministic Networking (DetNet), which provides a capability | |||
provides a capability to carry specified unicast or multicast | to carry specified unicast or multicast data flows for | |||
data flows for real-time applications with extremely low data los | real-time applications with extremely low data loss rates and | |||
s rates and bounded | bounded latency within a network domain. Techniques used | |||
latency within a network domain. Techniques used include: 1) res | include 1) reserving data-plane resources for individual (or | |||
erving data plane resources for individual | aggregated) DetNet flows in some or all of the intermediate | |||
(or aggregated) DetNet flows in some or all of the intermediate n | nodes along the path of the flow, 2) providing explicit routes | |||
odes along | for DetNet flows that do not immediately change with the | |||
the path of the flow; 2) providing explicit routes for DetNet flo | network topology, and 3) distributing data from DetNet flow | |||
ws that do not | packets over time and/or space to ensure delivery of each | |||
immediately change with the network topology; and 3) distributing | packet's data in spite of the loss of a path. DetNet operates | |||
data from DetNet flow packets | at the IP layer and delivers service over lower-layer | |||
over time and/or space to ensure delivery of each packet's data i | technologies such as MPLS and Time-Sensitive | |||
n spite of the loss of a path. | Networking (TSN) as defined by IEEE 802.1. | |||
DetNet operates at the IP layer and delivers service over lower layer te | </t> | |||
chnologies such as MPLS | </abstract> | |||
and IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN). | <boilerplate> | |||
</t> | <section anchor="status-of-memo" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc= | |||
</abstract> | "exclude" pn="section-boilerplate.1"> | |||
<name slugifiedName="name-status-of-this-memo">Status of This Memo</name | ||||
> | ||||
<t pn="section-boilerplate.1-1"> | ||||
This is an Internet Standards Track document. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<t pn="section-boilerplate.1-2"> | ||||
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force | ||||
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has | ||||
received public review and has been approved for publication by | ||||
the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further | ||||
information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of | ||||
RFC 7841. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<t pn="section-boilerplate.1-3"> | ||||
Information about the current status of this document, any | ||||
errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at | ||||
<eref target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8655"/>. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="copyright" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="excl | ||||
ude" pn="section-boilerplate.2"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-copyright-notice">Copyright Notice</name> | ||||
<t pn="section-boilerplate.2-1"> | ||||
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | ||||
document authors. All rights reserved. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<t pn="section-boilerplate.2-2"> | ||||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | ||||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | ||||
(<eref target="https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info"/>) in effect o | ||||
n the date of | ||||
publication of this document. Please review these documents | ||||
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with | ||||
respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this | ||||
document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in | ||||
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without | ||||
warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="toc" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="exclude" p | ||||
n="section-boilerplate.3"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-table-of-contents">Table of Contents</name> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-bo | ||||
ilerplate.3-1"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.1.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-1"/>. <xref de | ||||
rivedContent="Introduction" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-intro | ||||
duction">Introduction</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.2.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2"/>. <xref de | ||||
rivedContent="Terminology" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-termin | ||||
ology">Terminology</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="sectio | ||||
n-boilerplate.3-1.2.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.2.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.2.2.1.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="2.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.1"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Terms Used in This Document" format="title" sectionFor | ||||
mat="of" target="name-terms-used-in-this-document">Terms Used in This Document</ | ||||
xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.2.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.2.2.2.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="2.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.2"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Dictionary of Terms Used by TSN and DetNet" format="ti | ||||
tle" sectionFormat="of" target="name-dictionary-of-terms-used-by">Dictionary of | ||||
Terms Used by TSN and DetNet</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3"/>. <xref de | ||||
rivedContent="Providing the DetNet Quality of Service" format="title" sectionFor | ||||
mat="of" target="name-providing-the-detnet-qualit">Providing the DetNet Quality | ||||
of Service</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="sectio | ||||
n-boilerplate.3-1.3.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.1.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="3.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.1"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Primary Goals Defining the DetNet QoS" format="title" | ||||
sectionFormat="of" target="name-primary-goals-defining-the-">Primary Goals Defin | ||||
ing the DetNet QoS</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="3.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.2"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Mechanisms to Achieve DetNet QoS" format="title" secti | ||||
onFormat="of" target="name-mechanisms-to-achieve-detne">Mechanisms to Achieve De | ||||
tNet QoS</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="se | ||||
ction-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2.2.1 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="3.2.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-3.2.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="Resource Allocation" format="title" sectio | ||||
nFormat="of" target="name-resource-allocation">Resource Allocation</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2.2.2 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="3.2.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-3.2.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="Service Protection" format="title" section | ||||
Format="of" target="name-service-protection">Service Protection</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2.2.3"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.2.2.3 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="3.2.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-3.2.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="Explicit Routes" format="title" sectionFor | ||||
mat="of" target="name-explicit-routes">Explicit Routes</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.3"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.3.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="3.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Secondary Goals for DetNet" format="title" sectionForm | ||||
at="of" target="name-secondary-goals-for-detnet">Secondary Goals for DetNet</xre | ||||
f></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="se | ||||
ction-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.3.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.3.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.3.2.1 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-3.3.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="Coexistence with Normal Traffic" format="t | ||||
itle" sectionFormat="of" target="name-coexistence-with-normal-tra">Coexistence w | ||||
ith Normal Traffic</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.3.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.3.2.3.2.2 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-3.3.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="Fault Mitigation" format="title" sectionFo | ||||
rmat="of" target="name-fault-mitigation">Fault Mitigation</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4"/>. <xref de | ||||
rivedContent="DetNet Architecture" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="nam | ||||
e-detnet-architecture">DetNet Architecture</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="sectio | ||||
n-boilerplate.3-1.4.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.1"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="DetNet Stack Model" format="title" sectionFormat="of" | ||||
target="name-detnet-stack-model">DetNet Stack Model</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="se | ||||
ction-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1.2.1 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.1.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.1.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="Representative Protocol Stack Model" forma | ||||
t="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-representative-protocol-sta">Represent | ||||
ative Protocol Stack Model</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1.2.2 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.1.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.1.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="DetNet Data-Plane Overview" format="title" | ||||
sectionFormat="of" target="name-detnet-data-plane-overview">DetNet Data-Plane O | ||||
verview</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1.2.3"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.1.2.3 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.1.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.1.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="Network Reference Model" format="title" se | ||||
ctionFormat="of" target="name-network-reference-model">Network Reference Model</ | ||||
xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.2.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.2"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="DetNet Systems" format="title" sectionFormat="of" targ | ||||
et="name-detnet-systems">DetNet Systems</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="se | ||||
ction-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.2.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.2.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.2.2.1 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.2.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.2.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="End System" format="title" sectionFormat=" | ||||
of" target="name-end-system">End System</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.2.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.2.2.2 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.2.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.2.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="DetNet Edge, Relay, and Transit Nodes" for | ||||
mat="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-detnet-edge-relay-and-trans">DetNet | ||||
Edge, Relay, and Transit Nodes</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.3"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="DetNet Flows" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target | ||||
="name-detnet-flows">DetNet Flows</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="se | ||||
ction-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3.2.1 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.3.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.3.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="DetNet Flow Types" format="title" sectionF | ||||
ormat="of" target="name-detnet-flow-types">DetNet Flow Types</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3.2.2 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.3.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.3.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="Source Transmission Behavior" format="titl | ||||
e" sectionFormat="of" target="name-source-transmission-behavio">Source Transmiss | ||||
ion Behavior</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3.2.3"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.3.2.3 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.3.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.3.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="Incomplete Networks" format="title" sectio | ||||
nFormat="of" target="name-incomplete-networks">Incomplete Networks</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.4"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Traffic Engineering for DetNet" format="title" section | ||||
Format="of" target="name-traffic-engineering-for-det">Traffic Engineering for De | ||||
tNet</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="se | ||||
ction-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4.2.1 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.4.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.4.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="The Application Plane" format="title" sect | ||||
ionFormat="of" target="name-the-application-plane">The Application Plane</xref>< | ||||
/t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4.2.2 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.4.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.4.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="The Controller Plane" format="title" secti | ||||
onFormat="of" target="name-the-controller-plane">The Controller Plane</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4.2.3"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.4.2.3 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.4.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.4.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="The Network Plane" format="title" sectionF | ||||
ormat="of" target="name-the-network-plane">The Network Plane</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.5"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.5.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.5"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Queuing, Shaping, Scheduling, and Preemption" format=" | ||||
title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-queuing-shaping-scheduling-">Queuing, Sha | ||||
ping, Scheduling, and Preemption</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.6"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.6.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.6" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.6"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Service Instance" format="title" sectionFormat="of" ta | ||||
rget="name-service-instance">Service Instance</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.7" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.7"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Flow Identification at Technology Borders" format="tit | ||||
le" sectionFormat="of" target="name-flow-identification-at-tech">Flow Identifica | ||||
tion at Technology Borders</xref></t> | ||||
<ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="se | ||||
ction-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7.2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7.2.1"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7.2.1 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.7.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.7.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="Exporting Flow Identification" format="tit | ||||
le" sectionFormat="of" target="name-exporting-flow-identificati">Exporting Flow | ||||
Identification</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7.2.2"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7.2.2 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.7.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.7.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="Flow Attribute Mapping between Layers" for | ||||
mat="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-flow-attribute-mapping-betw">Flow At | ||||
tribute Mapping between Layers</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7.2.3"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.7.2.3 | ||||
.1"><xref derivedContent="4.7.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="sec | ||||
tion-4.7.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="Flow-ID Mapping Examples" format="title" s | ||||
ectionFormat="of" target="name-flow-id-mapping-examples">Flow-ID Mapping Example | ||||
s</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.8"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.8.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.8" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.8"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Advertising Resources, Capabilities, and Adjacencies" | ||||
format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-advertising-resources-capab">Adve | ||||
rtising Resources, Capabilities, and Adjacencies</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.9"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.9.1"><xre | ||||
f derivedContent="4.9" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.9"/ | ||||
>. <xref derivedContent="Scaling to Larger Networks" format="title" sectionForm | ||||
at="of" target="name-scaling-to-larger-networks">Scaling to Larger Networks</xre | ||||
f></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.10"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.4.2.10.1"><xr | ||||
ef derivedContent="4.10" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.1 | ||||
0"/>. <xref derivedContent="Compatibility with Layer 2" format="title" sectionFo | ||||
rmat="of" target="name-compatibility-with-layer-2">Compatibility with Layer 2</x | ||||
ref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.5"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.5.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-5"/>. <xref de | ||||
rivedContent="Security Considerations" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target= | ||||
"name-security-considerations">Security Considerations</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.6"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.6.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="6" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-6"/>. <xref de | ||||
rivedContent="Privacy Considerations" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target=" | ||||
name-privacy-considerations">Privacy Considerations</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.7"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.7.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="7" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-7"/>. <xref de | ||||
rivedContent="IANA Considerations" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="nam | ||||
e-iana-considerations">IANA Considerations</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.8"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.8.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="8" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8"/>. <xref de | ||||
rivedContent="Informative References" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target=" | ||||
name-informative-references">Informative References</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.9"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.9.1"><xref derive | ||||
dContent="" format="none" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.a"/><xref | ||||
derivedContent="Acknowledgements" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name | ||||
-acknowledgements">Acknowledgements</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.10"> | ||||
<t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-boilerplate.3-1.10.1"><xref deriv | ||||
edContent="" format="none" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.b"/><xref | ||||
derivedContent="Authors' Addresses" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="n | ||||
ame-authors-addresses">Authors' Addresses</xref></t> | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</boilerplate> | ||||
</front> | </front> | |||
<middle> | <middle> | |||
<section anchor="introduction" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fa | ||||
lse" pn="section-1"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-introduction">Introduction</name> | ||||
<t pn="section-1-1"> | ||||
This document provides the overall architecture for Deterministic | ||||
Networking (DetNet), which provides a capability for the delivery of | ||||
data flows with extremely low packet loss rates and bounded end-to-end | ||||
delivery latency. DetNet is for networks that are under a single | ||||
administrative control or within a closed group of administrative | ||||
control; these include campus-wide networks and private WANs. DetNet | ||||
is not for large groups of domains such as the Internet. </t> | ||||
<t pn="section-1-2"> | ||||
DetNet operates at the IP layer and delivers service over lower-layer | ||||
technologies such as MPLS and IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive Networking | ||||
(TSN). | ||||
<!-- **************************************************************** --> | DetNet provides a reliable and available service by dedicating network | |||
<!-- **************************************************************** --> | resources such as link bandwidth and buffer space to DetNet flows and/or | |||
<!-- **************************************************************** --> | classes of DetNet flows, and by replicating packets along multiple paths. | |||
<!-- **************************************************************** --> | Unused reserved resources are available to non-DetNet packets as long as all | |||
<section anchor='introduction' title="Introduction"> | guarantees are fulfilled. </t> | |||
<t pn="section-1-3"> The <xref target="RFC8557" format="default" sectionFo | ||||
rmat="of" derivedContent="RFC8557">"Deterministic | ||||
Networking Problem Statement"</xref> introduces DetNet, and <xref target="RFC857 | ||||
8" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8578">"Deterministic N | ||||
etworking Use Cases"</xref> summarizes the | ||||
need for it. See <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework" format="de | ||||
fault" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="DETNET-FRAMEWORK"/> for specific techn | ||||
iques | ||||
that can be used to identify DetNet flows and assign them to specific paths | ||||
through a network. </t> | ||||
<t pn="section-1-4"> A goal of DetNet is a converged network in all | ||||
respects, including the convergence of sensitive non-IP networks onto a common | ||||
network infrastructure. The presence of DetNet flows does not preclude | ||||
non-DetNet flows, and the benefits offered DetNet flows should not, except in | ||||
extreme cases, prevent existing Quality-of-Service (QoS) mechanisms from | ||||
operating in a normal fashion, subject to the bandwidth required for the | ||||
DetNet flows. A single source-destination pair can trade both DetNet and | ||||
non-DetNet flows. End systems and applications need not instantiate special | ||||
interfaces for DetNet flows. Networks are not restricted to certain | ||||
topologies; connectivity is not restricted. Any application that generates a | ||||
data flow that can be usefully characterized as having a maximum bandwidth | ||||
should be able to take advantage of DetNet, as long as the necessary resources | ||||
can be reserved. | ||||
<t> | Reservations can be made by the application itself, via network management, | |||
This document provides the overall architecture for Deterministic | centrally by an application's controller, or by other means, for instance, by | |||
Networking (DetNet), which provides a capability for the delivery of dat | placing on-demand reservation via a distributed Control Plane, e.g., | |||
a | leveraging the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) <xref target="RFC2205" forma | |||
flows with extremely | t="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2205"/>. | |||
low packet loss rates and bounded end-to-end delivery latency. | ||||
DetNet is for networks that are under a single administrative con | ||||
trol or | ||||
within a closed group of administrative control; these include ca | ||||
mpus-wide | ||||
networks and private WANs. DetNet is not for large groups of doma | ||||
ins such | ||||
as the Internet. | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
DetNet operates at the IP layer and delivers service over | ||||
lower layer technologies such as MPLS and IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive Netw | ||||
orking (TSN). | ||||
DetNet accomplishes these goals by dedicating network resources such as | ||||
link bandwidth | ||||
and buffer space to DetNet flows and/or | ||||
classes of DetNet flows, and by replicating packets along multipl | ||||
e paths. | ||||
Unused reserved resources are available to non-DetNet | ||||
packets as long as all guarantees are fulfilled. | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
The <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-problem-statement">Deterministi | ||||
c Networking | ||||
Problem Statement</xref> introduces Deterministic Networking, and | ||||
<xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-use-cases">Deterministic Networking | ||||
Use Cases</xref> summarizes the need for it. | ||||
See <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpls"/> and | ||||
<xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol-ip"/> for specific technique | ||||
s | ||||
that can be used to identify DetNet flows and assign them to spec | ||||
ific paths | ||||
through a network. | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
A goal of DetNet is a converged network in all respects including | ||||
the convergence of sensitive non-IP networks | ||||
onto a common network infrastructure. The presence | ||||
of DetNet flows does not preclude non-DetNet flows, and the benef | ||||
its offered | ||||
DetNet flows should not, except in extreme cases, prevent existin | ||||
g Quality of | ||||
Service (QoS) mechanisms from operating in a | ||||
normal fashion, subject to the bandwidth required for the DetNet | ||||
flows. A | ||||
single source-destination pair can trade both DetNet and non-DetN | ||||
et flows. | ||||
End systems and applications need not instantiate special interfa | ||||
ces for DetNet flows. | ||||
Networks are not restricted to certain topologies; connectivity i | ||||
s not restricted. | ||||
Any application that generates a data flow that can be usefully | ||||
characterized as having a maximum bandwidth should be able to tak | ||||
e advantage | ||||
of DetNet, as long as the necessary resources can be reserved. R | ||||
eservations | ||||
can be made by the application itself, via network management, by | ||||
an | ||||
application's controller, or by other means, e.g., a dynamic cont | ||||
rol plane | ||||
(e.g., <xref target="RFC2205"/>). QoS requirements of DetNet flow | ||||
s can be met if all | ||||
network nodes in a DetNet domain implement DetNet capabilities. D | ||||
etNet nodes can | ||||
be interconnected with different sub-network technologies | ||||
(<xref target="sec_dt_dp"/>), where the nodes of the subnet are n | ||||
ot | ||||
DetNet aware (<xref target="netref"/>). | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
Many applications that are intended to be served by Deterministic | ||||
Networking require the ability | ||||
to synchronize the clocks in end systems to a sub-microsecond acc | ||||
uracy. Some | ||||
of the queue control techniques defined in <xref target="QueuingM | ||||
odels"/> also | ||||
require time synchronization among network nodes. The means used | ||||
to achieve | ||||
time synchronization are not addressed in this document. DetNet | ||||
can accommodate | ||||
various time synchronization techniques and profiles that are def | ||||
ined elsewhere | ||||
to address the needs of different market segments. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section title="Terminology"> | QoS requirements of DetNet flows can be met if all network | |||
<section title="Terms used in this document"> | nodes in a DetNet domain implement DetNet capabilities. DetNet nodes can be | |||
<t> | interconnected with different sub-network technologies (<xref target="sec_dt_dp" | |||
format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.1.2"/>) where the | ||||
nodes of the subnet are not DetNet aware | ||||
(<xref target="netref" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Secti | ||||
on 4.1.3"/>). </t> | ||||
<t pn="section-1-5"> Many applications that are intended to be | ||||
served by DetNet require the ability to synchronize the clocks in end systems | ||||
to a sub-microsecond accuracy. Some of the queue-control techniques defined | ||||
in <xref target="QueuingModels" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedConte | ||||
nt="Section 4.5"/> also require time synchronization among | ||||
network nodes. The means used to achieve time synchronization are not | ||||
addressed in this document. DetNet can accommodate various | ||||
time-synchronization techniques and profiles that are defined elsewhere to | ||||
address the needs of different market segments. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-terminology">Terminology</name> | ||||
<section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.1 | ||||
"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-terms-used-in-this-document">Terms Used in Thi | ||||
s Document</name> | ||||
<t pn="section-2.1-1"> | ||||
The following terms are used in the context of DetNet in this document: | The following terms are used in the context of DetNet in this document: | |||
<list hangIndent="8" style="hanging"> | </t> | |||
<t hangText="allocation"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dl newline="true" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-2.1-2"> | |||
Resources are dedicated to support a DetNet flo | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.1">allocation</dt> | |||
w. Depending on an implementation, the resource may be reused by non-DetNet flow | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.2"> | |||
s when it is not used by the DetNet flow. | The dedication of resources | |||
</t> | to support a DetNet flow. Depending on an | |||
<t hangText="App-flow"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | implementation, the resource may be reused by | |||
non-DetNet flows when it is not used by the DetNet | ||||
flow. | ||||
</dd> | ||||
<dt pn="section-2.1-2.3">App-flow</dt> | ||||
<dd pn="section-2.1-2.4"> | ||||
The payload (data) carried over a DetNet service. | The payload (data) carried over a DetNet service. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet compound flow and DetNet member flo | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.5">DetNet compound flow and DetNet member flow</ | |||
w"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | dt> | |||
A DetNet compound flow is a DetNet flow that has | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.6"> A DetNet compound | |||
been separated into | flow is a DetNet flow that has been separated into | |||
multiple duplicate DetNet member flows for servic | multiple duplicate DetNet member flows for service | |||
e protection at the DetNet service sub-layer. | protection at the DetNet service sub-layer. Member | |||
Member flows are merged back into a single DetNet | flows are merged back into a single DetNet compound | |||
compound flow such that there are no duplicate packets. | flow such that there are no duplicate packets. | |||
"Compound" and "member" are strictly | "Compound" and "member" are strictly relative to | |||
relative to each other, not absolutes; a DetNet c | each other, not absolutes; a DetNet compound flow | |||
ompound flow comprising | comprising multiple DetNet member flows can, in | |||
multiple DetNet member flows can, in turn, be a m | turn, be a member of a higher-order compound. | |||
ember of a higher-order compound. | </dd> | |||
</t> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.7">DetNet destination</dt> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet destination"><vspace blankLines="0" | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.8"> | |||
/> | ||||
An end system capable of terminating a DetNet flo w. | An end system capable of terminating a DetNet flo w. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet domain"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.9">DetNet domain</dt> | |||
The portion of a network that is DetNet aware. | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.10"> | |||
It includes end | The portion of a network that | |||
systems and DetNet nodes. | is DetNet aware. It includes end systems and DetNet | |||
</t> | nodes. | |||
<t hangText="DetNet edge node"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | </dd> | |||
An instance of a DetNet relay node that acts as | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.11">DetNet edge node</dt> | |||
a source and/or | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.12"> An instance | |||
destination at the DetNet service sub-layer. Fo | of a DetNet relay node that acts as a source and/or | |||
r example, it can | destination at the DetNet service sub-layer. For | |||
include a DetNet service sub-layer proxy functi | example, it can include a DetNet service sub-layer | |||
on for DetNet service | proxy function for DetNet service protection (e.g., | |||
protection (e.g., the addition or removal of pa | the addition or removal of packet sequencing | |||
cket sequencing information) | information) for one or more end systems, it can start | |||
for one or more end systems, or starts or termi | or terminate resource allocation at the DetNet | |||
nates resource allocation at | forwarding sub-layer, or it can aggregate DetNet servic | |||
the DetNet forwarding sub-layer, or aggregates | es | |||
DetNet services into new DetNet flows. | into new DetNet flows. It is analogous to a Label | |||
It is analogous to a Label Edge Router (LER) or | Edge Router (LER) or a Provider Edge (PE) router. | |||
a Provider Edge (PE) router. | </dd> | |||
</t> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.13">DetNet flow</dt> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet flow"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.14"> | |||
A DetNet flow is a sequence of packets which conf | A sequence of packets that conforms uniquely | |||
orm uniquely | to a flow identifier and to which the DetNet serv | |||
to a flow identifier, and to which the DetNet ser | ice is to be | |||
vice is to be | ||||
provided. It includes any DetNet headers added to support the | provided. It includes any DetNet headers added to support the | |||
DetNet service and forwarding sub-layers. | DetNet service and forwarding sub-layers. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet forwarding sub-layer"><vspace blank | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.15">DetNet forwarding sub-layer</dt> | |||
Lines="0"/> | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.16"> | |||
DetNet functionality is divided into two sub-la | DetNet functionality is divided into two sub-layers. | |||
yers. One of | One of | |||
them is the DetNet forwarding sub-layer, which | them is the DetNet forwarding sub-layer, which option | |||
optionally | ally | |||
provides resource allocation for DetNet flows o ver paths | provides resource allocation for DetNet flows o ver paths | |||
provided by the underlying network. | provided by the underlying network. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet intermediate node"><vspace blankLin | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.17">DetNet intermediate node</dt> | |||
es="0"/> | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.18"> | |||
A DetNet relay node or DetNet transit node. | A DetNet relay node or DetNet transit node. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet node"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.19">DetNet node</dt> | |||
A DetNet edge node, a DetNet relay node, or a | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.20"> A | |||
DetNet transit node. | DetNet edge node, a DetNet relay | |||
</t> | node, or a DetNet transit node. | |||
<t hangText="DetNet relay node"><vspace blankLines="0"/ | </dd> | |||
> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.21">DetNet relay node</dt> | |||
A DetNet node including a service sub-layer funct | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.22"> A DetNet | |||
ion that interconnects different | node that includes a service | |||
DetNet forwarding sub-layer paths to provide serv | sub-layer function that interconnects different | |||
ice protection. A DetNet relay node | DetNet forwarding sub-layer paths to provide service | |||
participates in the DetNet service | protection. A DetNet relay node participates in the | |||
sub-layer. It typically incorporates DetNet forw | DetNet service sub-layer. It typically incorporates | |||
arding sub-layer functions as | DetNet forwarding sub-layer functions as well, in | |||
well, in which case it is collocated with a trans | which case it is collocated with a transit node. | |||
it node. | </dd> | |||
</t> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.23">DetNet service sub-layer</dt> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet service sub-layer"><vspace blankLin | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.24"> | |||
es="0"/> | DetNet functionality is divided into two sub-layers. One of | |||
DetNet functionality is divided into two sub-la | them is the DetNet service sub-layer, at which a DetNet | |||
yers. One of | service (e.g., service protection) is provided. | |||
them is the DetNet service sub-layer, at which | </dd> | |||
a DetNet service, | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.25">DetNet service proxy</dt> | |||
e.g., service protection is provided. | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.26"> | |||
</t> | A proxy that maps between App-flows and DetNet flows. | |||
<t hangText="DetNet service proxy"><vspace blankLines=" | </dd> | |||
0"/> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.27">DetNet source</dt> | |||
Maps between App-flows and DetNet flows. | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.28"> | |||
</t> | ||||
<t hangText="DetNet source"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | ||||
An end system capable of originating a DetNet f low. | An end system capable of originating a DetNet f low. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet system"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.29">DetNet system</dt> | |||
A DetNet aware end system, transit node, or rel | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.30"> | |||
ay node. | A DetNet-aware end system, transit node, or rel | |||
ay node. | ||||
"DetNet" may be omitted in some text. | "DetNet" may be omitted in some text. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet transit node"><vspace blankLines="0 | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.31">DetNet transit node</dt> | |||
"/> | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.32"> | |||
A DetNet node operating at the DetNet forwardin | A DetNet node, operating at the DetNet forwarding sub- | |||
g sub-layer, that utilizes link layer | layer, | |||
and/or network layer switching across multiple | that utilizes link-layer and/or network-layer | |||
links and/or sub-networks to provide paths for | switching across multiple links and/or sub-networks | |||
DetNet service sub-layer functions. | to provide paths for DetNet service sub-layer | |||
Typically provides resource allocation over tho | functions. It typically provides resource allocation | |||
se paths. | over those paths. An MPLS Label Switch Router (LSR) is | |||
An MPLS LSR is an example of a DetNet transit n | an example of a | |||
ode. | DetNet transit node. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="DetNet-UNI"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.33">DetNet-UNI</dt> | |||
User-to-Network Interface with DetNet specific | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.34"> | |||
functionalities. It is a packet-based reference point and may provide multiple f | A User-to-Network Interface (UNI) with DetNet-specific | |||
unctions like encapsulation, status, synchronization, etc. | functionalities. It is a packet-based reference | |||
</t> | point and may provide multiple functions like | |||
<t hangText="end system"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | encapsulation, status, synchronization, etc. | |||
Commonly called a "host" in IETF documents, and | </dd> | |||
an "end | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.35">end system</dt> | |||
station" is IEEE 802 documents. End systems of | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.36"> | |||
interest to | Commonly called a "host" in the RFC series and an | |||
this document are either sources or destination | "end station" in IEEE 802 standards. End systems of | |||
s of DetNet flows. | interest to this document are either sources or | |||
And end system may or may not be DetNet forward | destinations of DetNet flows, and they may or may | |||
ing sub-layer aware or | not be aware of DetNet forwarding sub-layers or | |||
DetNet service sub-layer aware. | DetNet service sub-layers. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="link"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.37">link</dt> | |||
A connection between two DetNet nodes. It may | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.38"> | |||
be composed of a | A connection between two DetNet nodes. It may be | |||
physical link | composed of a physical link or a sub-network | |||
or a sub-network technology that can provide ap | technology that can provide appropriate traffic | |||
propriate traffic | delivery for DetNet flows. | |||
delivery for DetNet | </dd> | |||
flows. | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.39">Packet Elimination Function (PEF)</dt> | |||
</t> | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.40"> | |||
<t hangText="PEF"> | A function that eliminates duplicate | |||
A Packet Elimination Function (PEF) eliminates duplicate copi | copies of packets to prevent excess packets flooding the | |||
es of packets | network or duplicate packets being sent out of the DetNet | |||
to prevent excess packets flooding the network or | domain. A PEF can be implemented by a DetNet edge node, a | |||
duplicate packets being | DetNet relay node, or an end system. | |||
sent out of the DetNet domain. PEF can be impleme | </dd> | |||
nted by a DetNet edge node, a | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.41">Packet Replication Function (PRF)</dt> | |||
DetNet relay node, or an end system. | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.42"> | |||
</t> | A function that replicates DetNet flow | |||
packets and forwards them to one or more next hops in the | ||||
<t hangText="PRF"> | DetNet domain. The number of packet copies sent to the | |||
A Packet Replication Function (PRF) replicates DetNet flow pa | next hops is a parameter specific to the DetNet flow at the p | |||
ckets | oint | |||
and forwards them to one or more next hops in the | of replication. A PRF can be implemented by a DetNet edge | |||
DetNet domain. | node, a DetNet relay node, or an end system. | |||
The number of packet copies sent to the next hops | </dd> | |||
is a DetNet flow | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.43">PREOF</dt> | |||
specific parameter at the point of replication. P | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.44"> | |||
RF can be | A collective name for Packet Replication, Elimination, and Or | |||
implemented by a DetNet edge node, a DetNet relay | dering Functions. | |||
node, or an end system. | </dd> | |||
</t> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.45">Packet Ordering Function (POF)</dt> | |||
<dd pn="section-2.1-2.46"> | ||||
<t hangText="PREOF"> | A function that reorders packets within | |||
Collective name for Packet Replication, Elimination, and Orde | a DetNet flow that are received out of order. This | |||
ring Functions. | function can be implemented by a DetNet edge node, a | |||
</t> | DetNet relay node, or an end system. | |||
</dd> | ||||
<t hangText="POF"> | <dt pn="section-2.1-2.47">reservation</dt> | |||
A Packet Ordering Function (POF) re-orders packets within a D | <dd pn="section-2.1-2.48"> | |||
etNet flow that are received out of order. | The set of resources allocated between a source and | |||
This function can be implemented by a DetNet edge node, a Det | one or more destinations through DetNet nodes and | |||
Net relay node, or an end system. | subnets associated with a DetNet flow in order to provi | |||
</t> | de | |||
the provisioned DetNet service. | ||||
<t hangText="reservation"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | </dd> | |||
The set of resources allocated between a source a | </dl> | |||
nd one or more destinations through DetNet nodes | </section> | |||
and subnets associated with a DetNet flow, to pro | <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.2 | |||
vide the provisioned DetNet service. | "> | |||
</t> | <name slugifiedName="name-dictionary-of-terms-used-by">Dictionary of Ter | |||
</list> | ms Used by TSN and DetNet</name> | |||
</t> | <t pn="section-2.2-1"> | |||
</section> | This section serves as a dictionary for translating the | |||
<section title="IEEE 802.1 TSN to DetNet dictionary"> | ||||
<t> | ||||
This section also serves as a dictionary for translatin | ||||
g from the | ||||
terms used by the Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) Task Group | terms used by the Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) Task Group | |||
<xref target="IEEE802.1TSNTG"/> of the IEEE 802.1 WG t | <xref target="IEEE802.1TSNTG" format="default" sectionF | |||
o those of | ormat="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.1TSNTG"/> of the IEEE 802.1 WG to those of | |||
the DetNet WG. | the Deterministic Networking (detnet) WG of the IETF. | |||
<list hangIndent="8" style="hanging"> | </t> | |||
<t hangText="Listener"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dl newline="true" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-2.2-2"> | |||
The IEEE 802.1 term for a destination o | <dt pn="section-2.2-2.1">Listener</dt> | |||
f a DetNet flow. | <dd pn="section-2.2-2.2"> | |||
</t> | The term used by IEEE 802.1 for a desti | |||
<t hangText="relay system"><vspace blankLines=" | nation of a DetNet flow. | |||
0"/> | </dd> | |||
The IEEE 802.1 term for a DetNet interm | <dt pn="section-2.2-2.3">Relay system</dt> | |||
ediate node. | <dd pn="section-2.2-2.4"> | |||
</t> | The term used by IEEE | |||
<t hangText="Stream"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | 802.1 for a DetNet intermediate node. | |||
The IEEE 802.1 term for a DetNet flow. | </dd> | |||
</t> | <dt pn="section-2.2-2.5">Stream</dt> | |||
<t hangText="Talker"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dd pn="section-2.2-2.6"> | |||
The IEEE 802.1 term for the source of a | The term used by IEEE 802.1 for a DetNe | |||
DetNet flow. | t flow. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
</list> | <dt pn="section-2.2-2.7">Talker</dt> | |||
</t> | <dd pn="section-2.2-2.8"> | |||
</section> | The term used by IEEE | |||
</section> | 802.1 for the source of a DetNet flow. | |||
</dd> | ||||
<section anchor="ProvidingQoS" title="Providing the DetNet Quality of Ser | </dl> | |||
vice"> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="DefiningGoals" title="Primary goals defining the DetNet Q | </section> | |||
oS"> | <section anchor="ProvidingQoS" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fa | |||
<t> | lse" pn="section-3"> | |||
The DetNet Quality of Service can be expressed in terms o | <name slugifiedName="name-providing-the-detnet-qualit">Providing the DetNe | |||
f: | t Quality of Service</name> | |||
<list style="symbols"> | <section anchor="DefiningGoals" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC= | |||
<t> | "false" pn="section-3.1"> | |||
Minimum and maximum end-to-end latency from source to des | <name slugifiedName="name-primary-goals-defining-the-">Primary Goals Def | |||
tination; | ining the DetNet QoS</name> | |||
timely delivery, and bounded jitter (packet delay variation) derived | <t pn="section-3.1-1"> | |||
from these constraints. | The DetNet QoS can be expressed in terms of: | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<t> | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.1-2"> | |||
Packet loss ratio, under various assumptions as to the op | <li pn="section-3.1-2.1"> | |||
erational | Minimum and maximum end-to-end latency from source to | |||
destination, timely delivery, and bounded jitter | ||||
(packet delay variation) derived from these | ||||
constraints. | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-3.1-2.2"> | ||||
Packet loss ratio under various assumptions as to the ope | ||||
rational | ||||
states of the nodes and links. | states of the nodes and links. | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-3.1-2.3"> | ||||
An upper bound on out-of-order packet delivery. It is wor th noting | An upper bound on out-of-order packet delivery. It is wor th noting | |||
that some DetNet applications are unable to tolerate any | that some DetNet applications are unable to tolerate any | |||
out-of-order delivery. | out-of-order delivery. | |||
</t> | </li> | |||
</list> | </ul> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-3.1-3"> | |||
It is a distinction of DetNet that it is concerned solely with | It is a distinction of DetNet that it is concerned solely with | |||
worst-case values for the end-to-end latency, jitter, and | worst-case values for the end-to-end latency, jitter, and | |||
misordering. Average, mean, or typical values are of litt le | misordering. Average, mean, or typical values are of litt le | |||
interest, because they do not affect the ability of a rea l-time | interest, because they do not affect the ability of a rea l-time | |||
system to perform its tasks. In general, a trivial priori ty-based | system to perform its tasks. In general, a trivial priori ty-based | |||
queuing scheme will give better average latency to a data flow than | queuing scheme will give better average latency to a data flow than | |||
DetNet; however, it may not be a suitable option for DetN et because | DetNet; however, it may not be a suitable option for DetN et because | |||
of its worst-case latency. | of its worst-case latency. | |||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
<t pn="section-3.1-4"> | ||||
Three techniques are used by DetNet to provide these qual ities of service: | Three techniques are used by DetNet to provide these qual ities of service: | |||
<list style="symbols"> | </t> | |||
<t> | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.1-5"> | |||
Resource allocation (<xref target="Zero"/ | <li pn="section-3.1-5.1"> | |||
>). | Resource allocation (<xref target="Zero" | |||
</t><t> | format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2.1"/>) | |||
Service protection (<xref target="srvcpro | </li> | |||
t"/>). | <li pn="section-3.1-5.2"> | |||
</t><t> | Service protection (<xref target="srvcpro | |||
Explicit routes (<xref target="pinned"/>) | t" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2.2"/>) | |||
. | </li> | |||
</t> | <li pn="section-3.1-5.3"> | |||
</list> | Explicit routes (<xref target="pinned" fo | |||
</t><t> | rmat="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2.3"/>) | |||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
<t pn="section-3.1-6"> | ||||
Resource allocation operates by assigning resources, e.g., buffer | Resource allocation operates by assigning resources, e.g., buffer | |||
space or link bandwidth, to a DetNet flow (or flow aggregate) along | space or link bandwidth, to a DetNet flow (or flow aggregate) along | |||
its path. Resource allocation greatly reduces, or even eliminates | its path. Resource allocation greatly reduces, or even eliminates | |||
entirely, packet loss due to output packet contention within the | entirely, packet loss due to output packet contention within the | |||
network, but it can only be supplied to a DetNet flow that is limite d | network, but it can only be supplied to a DetNet flow that is limite d | |||
at the source to a maximum packet size and transmission rate. | at the source to a maximum packet size and transmission rate. | |||
As DetNet flows are assumed to be rate-limited and DetNet is designed | As DetNet flows are assumed to be rate limited and DetNet is designed | |||
to provide sufficient allocated resources (including prov isioned | to provide sufficient allocated resources (including prov isioned | |||
capacity), the use of transport layer congestion control | capacity), the use of transport-layer congestion control | |||
<xref target="RFC2914"/> for App-flows is not required; h | <xref target="RFC2914" format="default" sectionFormat="of | |||
owever, | " derivedContent="RFC2914"/> for App-flows is not required; however, | |||
if resources are allocated appropriately, use of congesti on control | if resources are allocated appropriately, use of congesti on control | |||
should not impact transmission negatively. | should not impact transmission negatively. | |||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
Resource allocation addresses two of the DetNet QoS requirements: | <t pn="section-3.1-7"> Resource allocation addresses two of the DetNet Q | |||
latency and packet loss. Given that DetNet nodes have a finite | oS requirements: latency | |||
amount of buffer space, resource allocation necessarily results in | and packet loss. Given that DetNet nodes have a finite amount of buffer space, | |||
a maximum end-to-end latency. It also addresses contention related | resource allocation necessarily results in a maximum end-to-end | |||
packet loss. | latency. Resource allocation also addresses contention-related packet loss. | |||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
Other important contribution to packet loss are | <t pn="section-3.1-8"> Other important contributions to packet loss are | |||
random media errors and equipment failures. Service prot | random media errors | |||
ection is the name for the | and equipment failures. Service protection is the name for the mechanisms | |||
mechanisms used by DetNet to address these losses. The m | used by DetNet to address these losses. The mechanisms employed are | |||
echanisms employed are | constrained by the need to meet the users' latency requirements. Packet | |||
constrained by the requirement to meet the users' latency | replication and elimination (<xref target="Seamless" format="default" sectionFor | |||
requirements. | mat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2.2.2"/>) and packet encoding | |||
Packet replication and elimination (<xref target="srvcpro | (<xref target="PacketEncoding" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedConten | |||
t"/>) and packet encoding | t="Section 3.2.2.3"/>) are described in this document to provide | |||
(<xref target="PacketEncoding"/>) are described in this document | service protection, but other mechanisms may also be found. For instance, | |||
to provide service protection; others may be found. For i | packet encoding can be used to provide service protection against random media | |||
nstance, packet encoding | errors, while packet replication and elimination can be used to provide | |||
can be used to provide service protection against random media error | service protection against equipment failures. This mechanism distributes the | |||
s, packet | contents of DetNet flows over multiple paths in time and/or space, so that the | |||
replication and elimination can be used to provide service protectio | loss of some of the paths does need not cause the loss of any packets. | |||
n against | </t> | |||
equipment failures. This mechanism | <t pn="section-3.1-9"> The paths are typically (but not necessarily) exp | |||
distributes the contents of DetNet flows | licit routes so that | |||
over multiple paths in time and/or space, so that the los | they do not normally suffer temporary interruptions caused by the convergence | |||
s of some of the paths does | of routing or bridging protocols. </t> | |||
need not cause the loss of any packets. | <t pn="section-3.1-10"> These three techniques can be applied individual | |||
</t><t> | ly or applied together; it | |||
The paths are typically (but not necessarily) explicit ro | results that eight combinations, including none (no DetNet), are | |||
utes, so that they do not normally | possible. Some combinations, however, are of wider utility than others. This | |||
suffer temporary interruptions caused by the convergence | separation keeps the protocol stack coherent and maximizes interoperability | |||
of routing or bridging protocols. | with existing and developing standards in the IETF and other Standards | |||
</t><t> | Development Organizations. The following are examples of typical expected | |||
These three techniques can be applied independently, givi | combinations: | |||
ng eight possible combinations, | </t> | |||
including none (no DetNet), although some combinations ar | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.1-11"> | |||
e of wider utility than others. | <li pn="section-3.1-11.1"> | |||
This separation keeps the protocol stack coherent and max | The combination of explicit routes and service protection is the techniqu | |||
imizes interoperability with | e | |||
existing and developing standards in this (IETF) and othe | employed by seamless redundancy mechanisms applied on a ring topology, | |||
r | e.g., as described in <xref target="IEC-62439-3" format="default" section | |||
Standards Development Organizations. Some examples of ty | Format="of" derivedContent="IEC-62439-3"/>. In this | |||
pical expected combinations: | example, explicit routes are achieved by limiting the physical | |||
<list style="symbols"> | topology of the network to a ring. Sequentialization, replication, and | |||
<t> | duplicate elimination are facilitated by packet tags added at the | |||
Explicit routes plus service protection a | front or the end of Ethernet frames. <xref target="RFC8227" format="defau | |||
re exactly the techniques | lt" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8227"/> provides | |||
employed by seamless redundancy mechanism | another example in the context of MPLS. </li> | |||
s applied on a ring topology | <li pn="section-3.1-11.2"> Resource allocation | |||
as described, e.g., in <xref target="IEC6 | alone was originally offered by Audio Video Bridging as defined by IEEE 8 | |||
2439-3-2016"/>. In this example, | 02.1 <xref target="IEEE802.1BA" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedConte | |||
explicit routes are achieved by limiting | nt="IEEE802.1BA"/>. As long as the network suffers no failures, | |||
the physical topology of | packet loss due to output packet contention can be eliminated through | |||
the network to a ring. Sequentialization, | the use of a reservation protocol (e.g., the Multiple Stream Registration | |||
replication, and | Protocol <xref target="IEEE802.1Q" format="default" sectionFormat="of" de | |||
duplicate elimination are facilitated by | rivedContent="IEEE802.1Q"/>), shapers in every bridge, | |||
packet tags added at the | and proper dimensioning. </li> | |||
front or the end of Ethernet frames. <xre | <li pn="section-3.1-11.3"> Using all three together gives | |||
f target="RFC8227"/> provides | maximum protection. | |||
another example in the context of MPLS. | </li> | |||
</t><t> | </ul> | |||
Resource allocation alone was originally | <t pn="section-3.1-12"> There are, of course, simpler methods available | |||
offered by IEEE 802.1 Audio Video bridging | (and employed today) to | |||
<xref target="IEEE802.1BA"/>. As long as | achieve levels of latency and packet loss that are satisfactory for many | |||
the network suffers no failures, | applications. Prioritization and over-provisioning is one such technique. | |||
packet loss due to output packet contenti | However, these methods generally work best in the absence of any significant | |||
on can be eliminated through the use of a reservation protocol (e.g., Multiple S | amount of noncritical traffic in the network (if, indeed, such traffic is | |||
tream Registration Protocol <xref target="IEEE802.1Q-2018"/>), shapers in every | supported at all). They may also work only if the critical traffic constitutes o | |||
bridge, and proper dimensioning. | nly a small portion of | |||
</t><t> | the network's theoretical capacity, if all systems are functioning properly, | |||
Using all three together gives maximum pr | or if actions by end systems that disrupt the network's | |||
otection. | operations are absent. </t> | |||
</t> | <t pn="section-3.1-13"> There are any number of methods in use, defined, | |||
</list> | or in progress for | |||
</t><t> | accomplishing each of the above techniques. It is expected that the DetNet | |||
There are, of course, simpler methods available (and empl | architecture defined in this document will assist various vendors, users, and/or | |||
oyed, today) to achieve | "vertical" Standards | |||
levels of latency and packet loss that are satisfactory f | Development Organizations (dedicated to a single industry) in making selections | |||
or many applications. | among the available means of implementing DetNet networks. | |||
Prioritization and over-provisioning is one such techniqu | </t> | |||
e. However, these | </section> | |||
methods generally work best in the absence of any signifi | <section anchor="Techniques" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fa | |||
cant amount of non-critical | lse" pn="section-3.2"> | |||
traffic in the network (if, indeed, such traffic is suppo | <name slugifiedName="name-mechanisms-to-achieve-detne">Mechanisms to Ach | |||
rted at all), or work only if | ieve DetNet QoS</name> | |||
the critical traffic constitutes only a small portion of | <section anchor="Zero" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" | |||
the network's theoretical | pn="section-3.2.1"> | |||
capacity, or work only if all systems are functioning pro | <name slugifiedName="name-resource-allocation">Resource Allocation</na | |||
perly, or in the absence of | me> | |||
actions by end systems that disrupt the network's operati | <section anchor="ZeroL" numbered="true" toc="exclude" removeInRFC="fal | |||
ons. | se" pn="section-3.2.1.1"> | |||
</t><t> | <name slugifiedName="name-eliminate-contention-loss">Eliminate Conte | |||
There are any number of methods in use, defined, or in pr | ntion Loss</name> | |||
ogress for accomplishing each | <t pn="section-3.2.1.1-1"> | |||
of the above techniques. It is expected that this DetNet | The primary means by which DetNet achieves its QoS | |||
Architecture will assist | assurances is to reduce, or even completely eliminate, | |||
various vendors, users, and/or "vertical" | packet loss due to output packet contention within a | |||
Standards Development Organizations (dedicated to a singl | DetNet node as a cause of packet loss. This can be | |||
e industry) to make selections | achieved only by the provision of sufficient buffer | |||
among the available means of implementing DetNet networks | storage at each node through the network to ensure | |||
. | that no packets are dropped due to a lack of buffer | |||
</t> | storage. Note that App-flows are generally not | |||
</section> | expected to be responsive to implicit <xref target="RFC29 | |||
<section anchor="Techniques" title="Mechanisms to achieve DetNet QoS"> | 14" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2914"/> or explicit c | |||
<section anchor="Zero" title="Resource allocation"> | ongestion notification | |||
<section anchor="ZeroL" title="Eliminate contention loss"> | <xref target="RFC3168" format="default" sectionFormat="of | |||
<t> | " derivedContent="RFC3168"/>. | |||
The primary means by which DetNet achieves its QoS assura | ||||
nces is to reduce, or even completely eliminate packet loss due to output packet | ||||
contention | ||||
within a DetNet node as a cause of packet loss. | ||||
This can be achieved only by the provision of | ||||
sufficient buffer storage at each node through the networ | ||||
k to ensure that no | ||||
packets are dropped due to a lack of buffer storage. | ||||
Note that App-flows are generally not expected to be res | ||||
ponsive to implicit <xref target="RFC2914"/> or explicit congestion notification | ||||
<xref target="RFC3168"/>. | ||||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
Ensuring adequate buffering requires, in turn, that the s | <t pn="section-3.2.1.1-2"> Ensuring adequate buffering requires, in | |||
ource, and every DetNet | turn, that | |||
node along the path to the destination (or nearly every n | the source and every DetNet node along the path to the | |||
ode, see | destination (or nearly every node; see <xref target="Incomplete" | |||
<xref target="Incomplete"/>) be careful to regulate its o | format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3.3"/>) be careful | |||
utput to not exceed the | to regulate its output to | |||
data rate for any DetNet flow, except for brief periods w | not exceed the data rate for any DetNet flow, except for brief | |||
hen making up for | periods when making up for interfering traffic. Any packet | |||
interfering traffic. Any packet sent ahead of its time p | sent ahead of its time potentially adds to the number of | |||
otentially adds to the | buffers required by the next-hop DetNet node and may thus | |||
number of buffers required by the next hop DetNet node an | exceed the resources allocated for a particular DetNet | |||
d may thus exceed the resources | flow. Furthermore, rate limiting (e.g., using traffic policing) | |||
allocated for a particular DetNet flow. Furthermore, rate | and shaping functions (e.g., shaping as defined in <xref target=" | |||
limiting, e.g., using traffic | RFC2475" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2475"/>) at the | |||
policing and shaping functions, e.g., <xref target="RFC24 | ingress of the DetNet domain must be applied. This is needed | |||
75"/>, at the ingress of the | for meeting the requirements of DetNet flows as well as for | |||
DetNet domain must be applied. This is needed for meeting | protecting non-DetNet traffic from potentially misbehaving | |||
the requirements of DetNet | DetNet traffic sources. Note that large buffers have some | |||
flows as well as for protecting non-DetNet traffic from p | issues (see, e.g., <xref target="BUFFERBLOAT" format="default" se | |||
otentially misbehaving DetNet | ctionFormat="of" derivedContent="BUFFERBLOAT"/>). </t> | |||
traffic sources. Note that large buffers have some issues | <t pn="section-3.2.1.1-3"> The low-level mechanisms described in <xr | |||
, see, e.g., <xref target="BUFFERBLOAT"/>. | ef target="QueuingModels" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Se | |||
</t><t> | ction 4.5"/> | |||
The low-level mechanisms described in <xref target="Queui | provide the necessary regulation of transmissions by an end system or DetNet | |||
ngModels"/> provide | node to provide resource allocation. The allocation of the bandwidth and | |||
the necessary | buffers for a DetNet flow requires provisioning. A DetNet node may have other | |||
regulation of transmissions by an end system or DetNet no | resources requiring allocation and/or scheduling that might otherwise be | |||
de to provide | over-subscribed and trigger the rejection of a reservation. | |||
resource allocation. The allocation of the bandwidth and | </t> | |||
buffers for a DetNet flow requires provisioning. | </section> | |||
A DetNet node may have other resources requiring allocati | <section anchor="Jitterless" numbered="true" toc="exclude" removeInRFC | |||
on and/or scheduling, | ="false" pn="section-3.2.1.2"> | |||
that might otherwise be over-subscribed and trigger the r | <name slugifiedName="name-jitter-reduction">Jitter Reduction</name> | |||
ejection of a reservation. | <t pn="section-3.2.1.2-1"> | |||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="Jitterless" title="Jitter Reduction"> | ||||
<t> | ||||
A core objective of DetNet is to enable the convergence of sensitive non- IP networks | A core objective of DetNet is to enable the convergence of sensitive non- IP networks | |||
onto a common network infrastructure. This requires the accurate emulatio n | onto a common network infrastructure. This requires the accurate emulatio n | |||
of currently deployed mission-specific networks, which | of currently deployed mission-specific networks, which, | |||
for example rely on point-to-point analog (e.g., 4-20mA modulation) and | for example, rely on point-to-point analog (e.g., 4-20mA modulation) and | |||
serial-digital cables (or buses) for highly reliable, synchronized and | serial-digital cables (or buses) for highly reliable, synchronized, and | |||
jitter-free communications. While the latency of analog transmissions is | jitter-free communications. While the latency of analog transmissions is | |||
basically the speed of light, legacy serial links are usually slow (in th e | basically the speed of light, legacy serial links are usually slow (in th e | |||
order of Kbps) compared to, say, Gigabit Ethernet, and some latency is us ually | order of Kbps) compared to, say, Gigabit Ethernet, and some latency is us ually | |||
acceptable. What is not acceptable is the introduction of excessive jitte r, | acceptable. What is not acceptable is the introduction of excessive jitte r, | |||
which may, for instance, affect the stability of control systems. | which may, for instance, affect the stability of control systems. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<t>Applications that are designed to operate on serial links usually do | <t pn="section-3.2.1.2-2">Applications that are designed to operate | |||
on serial links usually do | ||||
not provide services to recover the jitter, because jitter simply does no t | not provide services to recover the jitter, because jitter simply does no t | |||
exist there. DetNet flows are generally expected to be delivered in-order | exist there. DetNet flows are generally expected to be delivered in order , | |||
and the precise time of reception influences the processes. In order to | and the precise time of reception influences the processes. In order to | |||
converge such existing applications, | converge such existing applications, | |||
there is a desire to emulate all properties of the serial cable, such | there is a desire to emulate all properties of the serial cable, such | |||
as clock transportation, perfect flow isolation and fixed latency. While minimal | as clock transportation, perfect flow isolation, and fixed latency. While minimal | |||
jitter (in the form of specifying minimum, as well as maximum, end-to-end latency) | jitter (in the form of specifying minimum, as well as maximum, end-to-end latency) | |||
is supported by DetNet, there are practical limitations on packet-based n etworks | is supported by DetNet, there are practical limitations on packet-based n etworks | |||
in this regard. In general, users | in this regard. In general, users | |||
are encouraged to use a combination of: | are encouraged to use a combination of: | |||
<list style="symbols"> | </t> | |||
<t> | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.2.1.2- | |||
3"> | ||||
<li pn="section-3.2.1.2-3.1"> | ||||
Sub-microsecond time synchronization among all source an d destination | Sub-microsecond time synchronization among all source an d destination | |||
end systems, and | end systems, and | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-3.2.1.2-3.2"> | ||||
Time-of-execution fields in the application packets. | Time-of-execution fields in the application packets. | |||
</t> | </li> | |||
</list> | </ul> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-3.2.1.2-4"> | |||
Jitter reduction is provided by the mechanisms described in <xref ta | Jitter reduction is provided by the mechanisms described in <xref ta | |||
rget="QueuingModels"/> | rget="QueuingModels" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section | |||
4.5"/> | ||||
that also provide resource allocation. | that also provide resource allocation. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="srvcprot" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fa | ||||
<section anchor="srvcprot" title="Service Protection"> | lse" pn="section-3.2.2"> | |||
<t> | <name slugifiedName="name-service-protection">Service Protection</name | |||
Service protection aims to mitigate or eliminate packet loss due to | > | |||
equipment failures, including random media and/or memory faults. | <t pn="section-3.2.2-1"> | |||
These types of | Service protection aims to mitigate or eliminate packet loss due | |||
packet loss can be greatly reduced by spreading the data over mul | to equipment failures, including random media and/or memory | |||
tiple | faults. These types of packet loss can be greatly reduced by | |||
disjoint forwarding paths. Various service protection methods are | spreading the data over multiple disjoint forwarding | |||
described in <xref target="RFC6372"/>, e.g., 1+1 linear protectio | paths. Various service protection methods are described in <xref targ | |||
n. | et="RFC6372" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6372"/>, e.g | |||
This section describes the functional details of an additional me | ., 1+1 linear protection. The functional | |||
thod | details of an additional method are described in <xref target="Seamle | |||
in <xref target="Seamless"/>, which can be implemented as describ | ss" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2.2.2"/>, whic | |||
ed in | h can be implemented as described in | |||
<xref target="PacketEncoding"/> or as specified in | <xref target="PacketEncoding" format="default" sectionFormat="of" der | |||
<xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpls"/> in order to provide | ivedContent="Section 3.2.2.3"/> or as specified in <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet | |||
1+n hitless | -mpls" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="DETNET-MPLS"/> in ord | |||
protection. The appropriate service protection mechanism depends | er to provide 1+n hitless | |||
on the | protection. The appropriate service protection mechanism depends | |||
scenario and the requirements. | on the scenario and the requirements. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<section anchor="inorder" numbered="true" toc="exclude" removeInRFC="f | ||||
<section anchor="inorder" title="In-Order Delivery"> | alse" pn="section-3.2.2.1"> | |||
<t> | <name slugifiedName="name-in-order-delivery">In-Order Delivery</name | |||
Out-of-order packet delivery can be a side effect of service protection. | > | |||
Packets delivered out-of-order impact the amount of buffering nee | <t pn="section-3.2.2.1-1"> | |||
ded at | Out-of-order packet delivery can be a side effect of service | |||
the destination to properly process the received data. Such packe | protection. Packets delivered out of order impact the amount of | |||
ts | buffering needed at the destination to properly process the received | |||
also influence the jitter of a flow. The DetNet service includes | data. Such packets also influence the jitter of a flow. The guarantees | |||
maximum allowed misordering as a constraint. Zero misordering wou | of a DetNet service include a maximum amount of misordering as a | |||
ld be | constraint. Zero misordering would be a valid service constraint to | |||
a valid service constraint to reflect that the end system(s) of t | reflect that the end system(s) of the flow cannot tolerate any | |||
he | out-of-order delivery. A DetNet Packet Ordering Function (POF) | |||
flow cannot tolerate any out-of-order delivery. DetNet Packet Ord | (<xref target="Seamless" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedCont | |||
ering | ent="Section 3.2.2.2"/>) can be used to provide in-order delivery. | |||
Functionality (POF) (<xref target="Seamless"/>) can be used to pr | </t> | |||
ovide | </section> | |||
in-order delivery. | <section anchor="Seamless" numbered="true" toc="exclude" removeInRFC=" | |||
</t> | false" pn="section-3.2.2.2"> | |||
</section> | <name slugifiedName="name-packet-replication-and-elim">Packet Replic | |||
ation and Elimination</name> | ||||
<section anchor="Seamless" title="Packet Replication and Elimination"> | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-1"> | |||
<t> | ||||
This section describes a service protection method that sends copies | This section describes a service protection method that sends copies | |||
of the same packets over multiple paths. | of the same packets over multiple paths. </t> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-2"> The DetNet service | |||
The DetNet service sub-layer includes the packet replication (PRF), | sub-layer includes the PRF, PEF, and POF for use in DetNet edge, | |||
the | relay node, and end-system packet processing. These functions can be | |||
packet elimination (PEF), and the packet ordering functionali | enabled in a DetNet edge node, relay node, or end system. The | |||
ty (POF) | collective name for all three functions is Packet Replication, | |||
for use in DetNet edge, relay node, and end system packet | Elimination, and Ordering Functions (PREOF). The packet replication | |||
processing. | and elimination service protection method altogether involves four | |||
These functions can be enabled in a DetNet edge node, rel | capabilities: | |||
ay | </t> | |||
node or end system. The collective name for all three fun | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.2.2.2- | |||
ctions is | 3"> | |||
Packet Replication, Elimination, and Ordering Functions ( | <li pn="section-3.2.2.2-3.1"> | |||
PREOF). | Sequencing information is provided to the | |||
The packet replication and elimination service protection | ||||
method | ||||
altogether involves four capabilities: | ||||
<list style="symbols"> | ||||
<t> | ||||
Providing sequencing information to the | ||||
packets of a DetNet compound flow. This may | packets of a DetNet compound flow. This may | |||
be done by adding a sequence number or time stamp | be done by adding a sequence number or time | |||
as part of DetNet, or may be | stamp as part of DetNet, or it may be inherent | |||
inherent in the packet, e.g., in a higher layer p | in the packet, e.g., in a higher-layer | |||
rotocol, or associated to other physical | protocol or associated to other physical | |||
properties such as the precise time (and radio ch | properties such as the precise time (and radio | |||
annel) of reception of the packet. | channel) of reception of the packet. This is | |||
This is typically done once, at or near the sourc | typically done once, at or near the source. | |||
e. | </li> | |||
</t><t> | <li pn="section-3.2.2.2-3.2"> The PRF | |||
The Packet Replication Function (PRF) replicates | replicates these packets into multiple DetNet | |||
these packets | member flows and typically sends them along | |||
into multiple DetNet member flows and typically s | multiple different paths to the | |||
ends them along | destination(s), e.g., over the explicit routes | |||
multiple different paths to the destination(s), e | described in <xref target="pinned" format="defaul | |||
.g., over the | t" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2.3"/>. The location | |||
explicit routes of <xref target="pinned"/>. The l | within a DetNet node and the mechanism used | |||
ocation within | for the PRF are left open for implementations. | |||
a DetNet node, and the mechanism used for the PRF | </li> | |||
is left open | <li pn="section-3.2.2.2-3.3"> The PEF | |||
for implementations. | eliminates duplicate packets of a DetNet flow | |||
</t><t> | based on the sequencing information and a | |||
The Packet Elimination Function (PEF) eliminates | history of received packets. The output of the | |||
duplicate packets | PEF is always a single packet. This may be | |||
of a DetNet flow based on the sequencing informat | done at any DetNet node along the path to save | |||
ion and a history | network resources further downstream, in | |||
of received packets. The output of the PEF is alw | particular if multiple replication points | |||
ays a single packet. | exist. But the most common case is to perform | |||
This may be done at any DetNet node along the pat | this operation at the very edge of the DetNet | |||
h to save network | network, preferably in or near the | |||
resources further downstream, in particular if mu | receiver. The location within a DetNet node | |||
ltiple | and the mechanism used for the PEF is left open | |||
Replication points exist. But the most common cas | for implementations. </li> | |||
e is to | <li pn="section-3.2.2.2-3.4"> The | |||
perform this operation at the very edge of the De | POF uses the sequencing | |||
tNet network, | information to reorder a DetNet flow's packets | |||
preferably in or near the receiver. The location | that are received out of order. | |||
within a DetNet node, | </li> | |||
and mechanism used for the PEF is left open f | </ul> | |||
or implementations. | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-4"> The order in which a DetNet node applies | |||
</t><t> | PEF, POF, and | |||
The Packet Ordering Function (POF) uses the sequencin | PRF to a DetNet flow is left open for implementations. | |||
g information | </t> | |||
to re-order a DetNet flow's packets that are rece | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-5"> Some service protection mechanisms rely o | |||
ived out of order. | n switching from one flow to | |||
</t> | another when a failure of a flow is detected. Contrarily, packet replication | |||
</list> | and elimination combines the DetNet member flows sent along multiple different | |||
</t><t> | paths and performs a packet-by-packet selection of which to discard, e.g., | |||
The order in which a DetNet node applies PEF, POF, and PRF to | based on sequencing information. | |||
a DetNet flow is | </t> | |||
left open for implementations. | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-6">In the simplest case, this amounts to 1) r | |||
</t><t> | eplicating each packet in a | |||
Some service protection mechanisms rely on switching from one flow | source that has two interfaces and 2) conveying them through the network along | |||
to another when a failure of a flow is detected. Contrari | separate (Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) disjoint) paths to the similarly | |||
ly, packet | dual-homed destinations that 3) reorder the packets and 4) discard the | |||
replication and elimination combines the DetNet member fl | duplicates. This ensures that one path | |||
ows sent | remains, even if some DetNet intermediate node fails. The sequencing | |||
along multiple different paths, and performs a packet-by- | information can also be used for loss detection and for reordering. </t> | |||
packet | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-7"> | |||
selection of which to discard, e.g., based on sequencing | DetNet relay nodes in the network can provide replication and elimination | |||
information. | facilities at various points in the network so that multiple failures can be | |||
</t><t> | accommodated. </t> | |||
In the simplest case, this amounts to replicating each pa | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-8"> This is shown in <xref target="FigSeamles | |||
cket in a source that | s" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 1"/>, where the tw | |||
has two interfaces, and conveying them through the networ | o relay nodes | |||
k, along separate | each replicate (R) the DetNet flow on input, sending the DetNet member flows | |||
(Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) disjoint) paths, to the | to both the other relay node and to the end system, and eliminate duplicates | |||
similarly dual-homed destinations, that discard the extra | (E) on the output interface to the right-hand end system. Any one link in the | |||
s. This ensures that one | network can fail, and the DetNet compound flow can still get through. | |||
path remains, even if some DetNet intermediate node fails | Furthermore, two links can fail, as long as they are in different segments of | |||
. | the network. | |||
The sequencing information can also be used for loss dete | </t> | |||
ction and for re-ordering. | <figure anchor="FigSeamless" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn= | |||
</t><t> | "figure-1"> | |||
DetNet relay nodes in the network can provide | <name slugifiedName="name-packet-replication-and-elimi">Packet Rep | |||
replication and elimination | lication and Elimination</name> | |||
facilities at various points in the network, so that mult | <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.2.2.2-9 | |||
iple | .1"> | |||
failures can be accommodated. | > > > > > > > > > relay > > > & | |||
</t><t> | gt; > > > > | |||
This is shown in <xref target="FigSeamless"/>, where the | > /------------+ R node E +------------\ > | |||
two relay nodes | > / v + ^ \ > | |||
each replicate (R) the DetNet flow on input, sending the | ||||
DetNet member flows to both the other | ||||
relay node and to the end system, and eliminate duplicate | ||||
s (E) on the output | ||||
interface to the right-hand end system. Any one link in | ||||
the network can | ||||
fail, and the DetNet compound flow can still get through. | ||||
Furthermore, two links can | ||||
fail, as long as they are in different segments of the ne | ||||
twork. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<figure align="center" anchor="FigSeamless" | ||||
title="Packet replication and elimination"> | ||||
<artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ | ||||
> > > > > > > > > relay > > > > > > > > | ||||
> /------------+ R node E +------------\ > | ||||
> / v + ^ \ > | ||||
end R + v | ^ + E end | end R + v | ^ + E end | |||
system + v | ^ + system | system + v | ^ + system | |||
> \ v + ^ / > | > \ v + ^ / > | |||
> \------------+ R relay E +-----------/ > | > \------------+ R relay E +-----------/ > | |||
> > > > > > > > > node > > > > > > > > | > > > > > > > > > node > > > & | |||
]]></artwork> | gt; > > > ></artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-10">Packet replication and elimination does n | |||
Packet replication and elimination does not react to and | ot react to and correct failures; | |||
correct failures; it is | it is entirely passive. Thus, intermittent failures, mistakenly created | |||
entirely passive. Thus, intermittent failures, mistakenl | packet filters, or misrouted data is handled just the same as the equipment | |||
y created packet filters, | failures that are handled by typical routing and bridging protocols. </t> | |||
or misrouted data is handled just the same as the equipme | <t pn="section-3.2.2.2-11">If member flows that take different-lengt | |||
nt failures | h paths through the network are | |||
that are handled by typical routing and bridging protocol | combined, a merge point may require extra buffering to equalize the delays | |||
s. | over the different paths. This equalization ensures that the resultant | |||
</t><t> | compound flow will not exceed its contracted bandwidth even after one of the | |||
If member flows that take different-length paths | paths is restored after a failure. The extra buffering can be also used to | |||
through the network are combined, a merge | provide in-order delivery. | |||
point may require extra buffering to equalize the delays | </t> | |||
over the different paths. This | </section> | |||
equalization ensures that the resultant compound flow wil | <section anchor="PacketEncoding" numbered="true" toc="exclude" removeI | |||
l not exceed its | nRFC="false" pn="section-3.2.2.3"> | |||
contracted bandwidth even after one or the other of the p | <name slugifiedName="name-packet-encoding-for-service">Packet Encodi | |||
aths is restored | ng for Service Protection</name> | |||
after a failure. The extra buffering can be also used to | <t pn="section-3.2.2.3-1"> | |||
provide in-order delivery. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="PacketEncoding" title="Packet encoding for service protec | ||||
tion"> | ||||
<t> | ||||
There are methods for using multiple paths to provide service prot ection | There are methods for using multiple paths to provide service prot ection | |||
that involve encoding the information in a | that involve encoding the information in a | |||
packet belonging to a DetNet flow into multiple transmission units , | packet belonging to a DetNet flow into multiple transmission units , | |||
combining information from multiple packets into any given transmi ssion unit. | combining information from multiple packets into any given transmi ssion unit. | |||
Such techniques, also known as "network coding", | Such techniques, also known as "network coding", | |||
can be used as a DetNet service protection technique. | can be used as a DetNet service protection technique. | |||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="pinned" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fals | ||||
e" pn="section-3.2.3"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-explicit-routes">Explicit Routes</name> | ||||
<t pn="section-3.2.3-1"> | ||||
In networks controlled by typical dynamic control protocols such as IS-IS or | ||||
OSPF, a network topology event in one part of the network can impact, at least | ||||
briefly, the delivery of data in parts of the network remote from the failure | ||||
or recovery event. Even the use of redundant paths through a network, e.g., as | ||||
defined by <xref target="RFC6372" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedCon | ||||
tent="RFC6372"/>, does not eliminate the chances of packet | ||||
loss. Furthermore, out-of-order packet delivery can be a side effect of route | ||||
changes. </t> | ||||
<t pn="section-3.2.3-2"> Many real-time networks rely on physical ring | ||||
s of two-port | ||||
devices, with a relatively simple ring control protocol. This supports | ||||
redundant paths for service protection with a minimum of wiring. As an | ||||
additional benefit, ring topologies can often utilize different topology | ||||
management protocols from those used for a mesh network, with a consequent | ||||
reduction in the response time to topology changes. Of course, this comes at | ||||
some cost in terms of increased hop count, and thus latency, for the typical | ||||
path. </t> | ||||
<t pn="section-3.2.3-3"> In order to get the advantages of low hop cou | ||||
nt and still ensure against | ||||
even very brief losses of connectivity, DetNet employs explicit routes where | ||||
the path taken by a given DetNet flow does not change, at least not | ||||
immediately and likely not at all, in response to network topology events. | ||||
Service protection (see Sections <xref target="srvcprot" format="counter" sectio | ||||
nFormat="of" derivedContent="3.2.2"/> | ||||
and <xref target="PacketEncoding" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" derivedCon | ||||
tent="3.2.2.3"/>) over explicit routes | ||||
provides a high likelihood of continuous connectivity. Explicit routes can be | ||||
established in various ways, e.g., with RSVP-TE <xref target="RFC3209" format="d | ||||
efault" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC3209"/>, with | ||||
Segment Routing (SR) <xref target="RFC8402" format="default" sectionFormat="of" | ||||
derivedContent="RFC8402"/>, via a SDN approach <xref target="RFC8453" format="de | ||||
fault" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8453"/>, with IS-IS <xref target="R | ||||
FC7813" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7813"/>, etc. Ex | ||||
plicit routes | ||||
are typically used in MPLS TE (Traffic Engineering) Label Switched Paths | ||||
(LSPs). </t> | ||||
<t pn="section-3.2.3-4"> Out-of-order packet delivery can be a side ef | ||||
fect of distributing a single | ||||
flow over multiple paths, especially when there is a change from one path to | ||||
another when combining the flow. This is irrespective of the distribution | ||||
method used and also applies to service protection over explicit routes. As | ||||
described in <xref target="inorder" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedC | ||||
ontent="Section 3.2.2.1"/>, out-of-order packets influence the | ||||
jitter of a flow and impact the amount of buffering needed to process the | ||||
data; therefore, the guarantees of a DetNet service include a maximum amount | ||||
of misordering as a constraint. The use of explicit routes helps to provide in-o | ||||
rder delivery | ||||
because there is no immediate route change with the network topology, but the | ||||
changes are plannable as they are between the different explicit routes. | ||||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | <section anchor="MoreGoals" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fal | |||
se" pn="section-3.3"> | ||||
<section anchor="pinned" title="Explicit routes"> | <name slugifiedName="name-secondary-goals-for-detnet">Secondary Goals fo | |||
<t> | r DetNet</name> | |||
In networks controlled by typical dynamic control protoco | <t pn="section-3.3-1"> | |||
ls such as IS-IS or OSPF, | ||||
a network topology event in one part of the network | ||||
can impact, at least briefly, the delivery of data in par | ||||
ts of the network remote from the | ||||
failure or recovery event. Even the use of redundant path | ||||
s through a network, e.g., | ||||
as defined by <xref target="RFC6372"/> do not eliminate t | ||||
he chances of packet loss. Furthermore, | ||||
out-of-order packet delivery can be a side effect of rout | ||||
e changes. | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
Many real-time networks rely on physical rings of two-por | ||||
t devices, with | ||||
a relatively simple ring control protocol. This supports | ||||
redundant paths for | ||||
service protection with a minimum | ||||
of wiring. As an additional benefit, ring topologies can | ||||
often | ||||
utilize different topology management protocols than thos | ||||
e used for a mesh network, with | ||||
a consequent reduction in the response time to topology c | ||||
hanges. Of course, this comes | ||||
at some cost in terms of increased hop count, and thus la | ||||
tency, for the typical path. | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
In order to get the advantages of low hop count and still | ||||
ensure against even very brief | ||||
losses | ||||
of connectivity, DetNet employs explicit routes, where th | ||||
e path taken by a given DetNet flow | ||||
does not change, at least immediately, and likely not at | ||||
all, in response to network | ||||
topology events. Service protection (<xref target="srvcp | ||||
rot"/> or | ||||
<xref target="PacketEncoding"/>) | ||||
over explicit routes provides a high likelihood of contin | ||||
uous connectivity. | ||||
Explicit routes can be established in various ways, e.g., | ||||
with | ||||
RSVP-TE <xref target="RFC3209"/>, with Segment Routing (S | ||||
R) | ||||
<xref target="RFC8402"/>, via a Software | ||||
Defined Networking approach <xref target="RFC8453"/>, wit | ||||
h IS-IS | ||||
<xref target="RFC7813"/>, etc. | ||||
Explicit routes are typically used in MPLS TE LSPs. | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
Out-of-order packet delivery can be a side effect of dist | ||||
ributing a | ||||
single flow over multiple paths, especially when there is | ||||
a change | ||||
from one path to another when combining the flow. This is | ||||
irrespective of the distribution method used, and also ap | ||||
plies to | ||||
service protection over explicit routes. As described in | ||||
<xref target="inorder"/>, out-of-order packets influence | ||||
the | ||||
jitter of a flow and impact the amount of buffering neede | ||||
d to | ||||
process the data; therefore, DetNet service includes maxi | ||||
mum | ||||
allowed misordering as a constraint. The use of explicit | ||||
routes | ||||
helps to provide in-order delivery because there is no im | ||||
mediate | ||||
route change with the network topology, but the changes a | ||||
re plannable | ||||
as they are between the different explicit routes. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="MoreGoals" title="Secondary goals for DetNet"> | ||||
<t> | ||||
Many applications require DetNet to provide additional services, includi ng coexistence with | Many applications require DetNet to provide additional services, includi ng coexistence with | |||
other QoS mechanisms <xref target="Coexistence"/> and protection against | other QoS mechanisms (<xref target="Coexistence" format="default" sectio | |||
misbehaving transmitters | nFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.1"/>) and protection against misbehavin | |||
<xref target="FaultMitigation"/>. | g transmitters | |||
</t> | (<xref target="FaultMitigation" format="default" sectionFormat="of" deri | |||
<section anchor="Coexistence" title="Coexistence with normal traffic"> | vedContent="Section 3.3.2"/>). | |||
<t> | </t> | |||
A DetNet network supports the dedication of a high proportion of t | <section anchor="Coexistence" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC= | |||
he | "false" pn="section-3.3.1"> | |||
network bandwidth | <name slugifiedName="name-coexistence-with-normal-tra">Coexistence wit | |||
to DetNet flows. But, no matter how much is dedicated for DetNet | h Normal Traffic</name> | |||
flows, it is | <t pn="section-3.3.1-1"> | |||
a goal of DetNet to coexist with existing Class of Service schemes | A DetNet network supports the dedication of a high proportion of | |||
(e.g., DiffServ). | the network bandwidth to DetNet flows. But, no matter how much | |||
It is also | is dedicated for DetNet flows, it is a goal of DetNet to coexist | |||
important that non-DetNet traffic not disrupt the DetNet flow, of | with existing Class-of-Service schemes (e.g., DiffServ). It is | |||
course (see | also important that non-DetNet traffic not disrupt the DetNet | |||
<xref target="FaultMitigation"/> and <xref target="SecurityConside | flow, of course (see Sections <xref target="FaultMitigation" forma | |||
rations"/>). | t="counter" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="3.3.2"/> and <xref target="Securi | |||
For these reasons: | tyConsiderations" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="5"/>). Fo | |||
<list style="symbols"> | r these reasons: | |||
<t> | ||||
Bandwidth (transmission opportunities) not utilized by a D | ||||
etNet flow is available | ||||
to non-DetNet packets (though not to other DetNet flows). | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
DetNet flows can be shaped or scheduled, in order to ensur | ||||
e that the | ||||
highest-priority non-DetNet | ||||
packet is also ensured a worst-case latency. | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
When transmission opportunities for DetNet flows are sched | ||||
uled in detail, then | ||||
the algorithm constructing the schedule should leave suffi | ||||
cient opportunities for | ||||
non-DetNet packets to satisfy the needs of the users of th | ||||
e network. Detailed | ||||
scheduling can also permit the time-shared use of buffer r | ||||
esources by different | ||||
DetNet flows. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</list> | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
Starvation of non-DetNet traffic must be avoided, e.g., by traffic | ||||
policing and shaping functions (e.g., <xref target="RFC | ||||
2475"/>). Thus, the net | ||||
effect of the presence of DetNet flows in a network on | ||||
the | ||||
non-DetNet flows is primarily a reduction in the availa | ||||
ble bandwidth. | ||||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.3.1-2"> | |||
<section anchor="FaultMitigation" title="Fault Mitigation"> | <li pn="section-3.3.1-2.1">Bandwidth (transmission opportunities) no | |||
<t> | t utilized by a DetNet flow is | |||
Robust real-time systems require reducing the number of | available to non-DetNet packets (though not to other DetNet flows). </li> | |||
possible failures. Filters and policers should be used in a DetNet | <li pn="section-3.3.1-2.2"> DetNet flows can be shaped or scheduled, | |||
network to | in order to ensure that the | |||
detect if DetNet packets are received | highest-priority non-DetNet packet is also ensured a worst-case latency. </li> | |||
on the wrong interface, or at the wrong time, or in too great a vo | <li pn="section-3.3.1-2.3"> When transmission opportunities for DetN | |||
lume. | et flows are scheduled in detail, | |||
Furthermore, filters and policers can take | the algorithm constructing the schedule should leave sufficient | |||
actions to discard the offending packets or flows, or trigger | opportunities for non-DetNet packets to satisfy the needs of the users of the | |||
shutting down the offending flow or the offending interface. | network. Detailed scheduling can also permit the time-shared use of buffer | |||
</t><t> | resources by different DetNet flows. | |||
It is also essential that filters and service remarking be employe | </li> | |||
d at the network edge | </ul> | |||
to prevent non-DetNet | <t pn="section-3.3.1-3"> Starvation of non-DetNet traffic must be avoi | |||
packets from being mistaken for DetNet packets, and thus impinging | ded, for example, by | |||
on the resources | traffic policing and shaping functions (e.g., <xref target="RFC2475" f | |||
allocated to DetNet packets. In particular, sending DetNet traffic | ormat="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2475"/>). Thus, the net ef | |||
into networks that have not been provisioned in advance | fect of the presence of DetNet | |||
to handle | flows in a network on the non-DetNet flows is primarily a reduction | |||
that DetNet traffic has to be treated as a fault. The | in the available bandwidth. | |||
use of | </t> | |||
egress traffic filters, or equivalent mechanisms, to pr | </section> | |||
event this | <section anchor="FaultMitigation" numbered="true" toc="include" removeIn | |||
from happening are strongly recommended at the edges of | RFC="false" pn="section-3.3.2"> | |||
a DetNet | <name slugifiedName="name-fault-mitigation">Fault Mitigation</name> | |||
networks and DetNet supporting networks. In this conte | <t pn="section-3.3.2-1"> | |||
xt, the | Robust real-time systems require reducing the number of possible | |||
term 'provisioned' has a broad meaning, e.g., provision | failures. Filters and policers should be used in a DetNet | |||
ing could be | network to detect if DetNet packets are received on the wrong | |||
performed via an administrative decision that the downs | interface, at the wrong time, or in too great a volume. | |||
tream network | Furthermore, filters and policers can take actions to discard | |||
has the available capacity to carry the DetNet traffic | the offending packets or flows, or trigger shutting down the | |||
that is being | offending flow or the offending interface. </t> | |||
sent into it. | <t pn="section-3.3.2-2"> It is also | |||
</t><t> | essential that filters and service remarking be employed at the | |||
network edge to prevent non-DetNet packets from being mistaken | ||||
for DetNet packets and thus impinging on the resources | ||||
allocated to DetNet packets. In particular, sending DetNet | ||||
traffic into networks that have not been provisioned in advance | ||||
to handle that DetNet traffic has to be treated as a fault. The | ||||
use of egress traffic filters, or equivalent mechanisms, to | ||||
prevent this from happening are strongly recommended at the | ||||
edges of DetNet networks and DetNet supporting networks. In | ||||
this context, the term 'provisioned' has a broad meaning, e.g., | ||||
provisioning could be performed via an administrative decision | ||||
that the downstream network has the available capacity to carry | ||||
the DetNet traffic that is being sent into it. </t> | ||||
<t pn="section-3.3.2-3"> | ||||
Note that the sending of App-flows that do not use tran | Note that the sending of App-flows that do not use | |||
sport layer | transport-layer congestion control per <xref target="RF | |||
congestion control per <xref target="RFC2914"/> into a | C2914" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2914"/> into a net | |||
network that | work that is not | |||
is not provisioned to handle such DetNet traffic has to | provisioned to handle such traffic has to be treated | |||
be treated | as a fault and prevented. PRF-generated DetNet | |||
as a fault and prevented. PRF generated DetNet member f | member flows also need to be treated as not using | |||
lows also | transport-layer congestion control even if the | |||
need to be treated as not using transport layer congest | original App-flow supports transport-layer | |||
ion control | congestion control because PREOF can remove | |||
even if the original App-flow supports transport layer | congestion indications at the PEF and thereby hide | |||
congestion | such indications (e.g., drops, ECN markings, | |||
control because PREOF can remove congestion indications | increased latency) from end systems. | |||
at the PEF | ||||
and thereby hide such indications (e.g., drops, ECN mar | ||||
kings, | ||||
increased latency) from end systems. | ||||
</t><t> | ||||
The mechanisms to support these requirements are both data plane | ||||
and implementation specific. Data plane specific solut | ||||
ions will | ||||
be specified in the relevant data plane solution docume | ||||
nt. There | ||||
also exist techniques, at present and/or in various sta | ||||
ges of | ||||
standardization, that can support these fault mitigation tasks tha | ||||
t deliver a high probability that misbehaving | ||||
systems will have zero impact on well-behaved DetNet flows, except | ||||
of course, for | ||||
the receiving interface(s) immediately downstream of the misbehavi | ||||
ng device. | ||||
Examples of such techniques include traffic policing and shaping f | ||||
unctions (e.g., | ||||
<xref target="RFC2475"/>) and separating flows into per-flow rate- | ||||
limited queues, | ||||
and potentially apply active queue management <xref tar | ||||
get="RFC7567"/>. | ||||
</t> | </t> | |||
<t pn="section-3.3.2-4"> The mechanisms to support these requirements | ||||
are both Data | ||||
Plane and implementation specific. Solutions that are data-plane | ||||
specific will be specified in the relevant data-plane solution | ||||
document. There also exist techniques, at present and/or in various | ||||
stages of standardization, that can support these fault-mitigation | ||||
tasks that deliver a high probability that misbehaving systems will | ||||
have zero impact on well-behaved DetNet flows with the exception, of | ||||
course, of the receiving interface(s) immediately downstream from | ||||
the misbehaving device. Examples of such techniques include traffic | ||||
policing and shaping functions (e.g., those described in <xref target= | ||||
"RFC2475" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2475"/>), | ||||
separating flows into per-flow rate-limited queues, and potentially | ||||
applying active queue management <xref target="RFC7567" format="defaul | ||||
t" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7567"/>. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="arch" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn= | ||||
<section anchor="arch" title="DetNet Architecture"> | "section-4"> | |||
<section anchor="Stacks" title="DetNet stack model"> | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-architecture">DetNet Architecture</name> | |||
<t> | <section anchor="Stacks" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" | |||
DetNet functionality (<xref target="ProvidingQoS"/>) is impleme | pn="section-4.1"> | |||
nted | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-stack-model">DetNet Stack Model</name> | |||
<t pn="section-4.1-1"> | ||||
DetNet functionality (<xref target="ProvidingQoS" format="defau | ||||
lt" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3"/>) is implemented | ||||
in two adjacent sub-layers in the protocol stack: the DetNet se rvice | in two adjacent sub-layers in the protocol stack: the DetNet se rvice | |||
sub-layer and the DetNet forwarding sub-layer. The DetNet servi ce sub-layer | sub-layer and the DetNet forwarding sub-layer. The DetNet servi ce sub-layer | |||
provides DetNet service, e.g., service protection, to higher l ayers | provides DetNet service, e.g., service protection, to higher l ayers | |||
in the protocol stack and applications. The DetNet forwarding s ub-layer | in the protocol stack and applications. The DetNet forwarding s ub-layer | |||
supports DetNet service in the underlying network, e.g., by | supports DetNet service in the underlying network, e.g., by | |||
providing explicit routes and resource allocation to DetNet flo ws. | providing explicit routes and resource allocation to DetNet flo ws. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<section anchor="StackModel" title="Representative Protocol Stack Model" | <section anchor="StackModel" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC=" | |||
> | false" pn="section-4.1.1"> | |||
<t> | <name slugifiedName="name-representative-protocol-sta">Representative | |||
<xref target="ProtStack1"/> illustrates a conceptual DetNet data | Protocol Stack Model</name> | |||
plane layering model. | <t pn="section-4.1.1-1"><xref target="ProtStack1" format="default" sec | |||
One may compare it to that in <xref target="IEEE802.1CB"/>, Anne | tionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 2"/> illustrates a conceptual DetNet data | |||
x C. | -plane layering model. | |||
</t> | One may compare it to that in <xref target="IEEE802.1CB" format= | |||
<figure align="center" anchor="ProtStack1" | "default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.1CB"/>, Annex C. | |||
title="DetNet data plane protocol stack"> | </t> | |||
<artwork align="center"><![CDATA[ | <figure anchor="ProtStack1" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="fi | |||
gure-2"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-detnet-data-plane-protocol-">DetNet Data-P | ||||
lane Protocol Stack</name> | ||||
<artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-4.1.1-2.1 | ||||
"> | ||||
| packets going | ^ packets coming ^ | | packets going | ^ packets coming ^ | |||
v down the stack v | up the stack | | v down the stack v | up the stack | | |||
+-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | +-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | |||
| Source | | Destination | | | Source | | Destination | | |||
+-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | +-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | |||
| Service sub-layer: | | Service sub-layer: | | | Service sub-layer: | | Service sub-layer: | | |||
| Packet sequencing | | Duplicate elimination | | | Packet sequencing | | Duplicate elimination | | |||
| Flow replication | | Flow merging | | | Flow replication | | Flow merging | | |||
| Packet encoding | | Packet decoding | | | Packet encoding | | Packet decoding | | |||
+-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | +-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | |||
| Forwarding sub-layer: | | Forwarding sub-layer: | | | Forwarding sub-layer: | | Forwarding sub-layer: | | |||
| Resource allocation | | Resource allocation | | | Resource allocation | | Resource allocation | | |||
| Explicit routes | | Explicit routes | | | Explicit routes | | Explicit routes | | |||
+-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | +-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | |||
| Lower layers | | Lower layers | | | Lower layers | | Lower layers | | |||
+-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | +-----------------------+ +-----------------------+ | |||
v ^ | v ^ | |||
\_________________________/ | \_________________________/ | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-4.1.1-3"> | |||
Not all sub-layers are required for any given application, or ev en for any | Not all sub-layers are required for any given application, or ev en for any | |||
given network. The functionality shown in <xref target="ProtStac | given network. The functionality shown in <xref target="ProtStac | |||
k1"/> is: | k1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 2"/> is: | |||
<list hangIndent="8" style="hanging"> | </t> | |||
<t hangText="Application"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dl newline="true" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-4.1.1-4"> | |||
<dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.1">Application</dt> | ||||
<dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.2"> | ||||
Shown as "source" and "destination" in the diagram. | Shown as "source" and "destination" in the diagram. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="Packet sequencing"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.3">Packet sequencing</dt> | |||
As part of DetNet service protection, supplies the seque | <dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.4"> | |||
nce number for | As part of the DetNet service sub-layer, the packet | |||
packet replication and elimination (<xref target="srvcpr | sequencing function supplies the sequence number for | |||
ot"/>), thus peers | packet replication and elimination for DetNet service | |||
with Duplicate elimination. This sub-layer is not neede | protection (<xref target="Seamless" format="default" section | |||
d if a higher layer protocol | Format="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2.2.2"/>); thus, its peer is | |||
is expected to perform any packet sequencing and duplica | duplicate elimination. This sub-layer is not needed if a | |||
te elimination | higher-layer protocol is expected to perform any packet | |||
required by the DetNet flow replication. | sequencing and duplicate elimination required by the | |||
</t> | DetNet flow replication. | |||
<t hangText="Duplicate elimination"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | </dd> | |||
As part of the DetNet service sub-layer, based on the se | <dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.5">Duplicate elimination</dt> | |||
quenced number | <dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.6"> | |||
supplied by its peer, packet sequencing, | As part of the DetNet service sub-layer, based on the se | |||
Duplicate elimination discards any duplicate packets gen | quence number | |||
erated by DetNet | supplied by its peer (packet sequencing), | |||
duplicate elimination discards any duplicate packets gen | ||||
erated by DetNet | ||||
flow replication. It can operate on member flows, compo und flows, or both. | flow replication. It can operate on member flows, compo und flows, or both. | |||
The replication may also be inferred from other | The replication may also be inferred from other | |||
information such as the precise time of reception in a s cheduled network. | information such as the precise time of reception in a s cheduled network. | |||
The duplicate elimination sub-layer may also perform res equencing of packets | The duplicate elimination sub-layer may also perform res equencing of packets | |||
to restore packet order in a | to restore packet order in a | |||
flow that was disrupted by the loss of packets on one or another of | flow that was disrupted by the loss of packets on one or another of | |||
the multiple paths taken. | the multiple paths taken. | |||
</t> | </dd> | |||
<t hangText="Flow replication"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | <dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.7">Flow replication</dt> | |||
As part of DetNet service protection, packets that belon | <dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.8"> As | |||
g to a | part of DetNet service protection, packets that belong to | |||
DetNet compound flow are replicated into two or more Det | a DetNet compound flow are replicated into two or more | |||
Net member flows. | DetNet member flows. This function is separate from | |||
This function is separate from packet sequencing. Flow | packet sequencing. Flow replication can be an explicit | |||
replication | replication and remarking of packets or can be performed | |||
can be an explicit replication and remarking of packets, | by, for example, techniques similar to ordinary multicast | |||
or can be performed by, | replication, albeit with resource allocation implications. | |||
for example, techniques similar to ordinary multicast re | Its peer is DetNet flow merging. | |||
plication, albeit with | </dd> | |||
resource allocation implications. | <dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.9">Flow merging</dt> | |||
Peers with DetNet flow merging. | <dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.10"> As | |||
</t> | part of the DetNet service sub-layer, the flow merging | |||
<t hangText="Flow merging"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | function combines DetNet member flows together for packets | |||
As part of DetNet service protection, merges | coming up the stack belonging to a specific DetNet | |||
DetNet member flows together for packets coming up the s | compound flow. DetNet flow merging, together with packet | |||
tack belonging to a | sequencing, duplicate elimination, and DetNet flow | |||
specific DetNet compound flow. | replication perform packet replication and elimination | |||
Peers with DetNet flow replication. | (<xref target="srvcprot" format="default" sectionFormat="of" | |||
DetNet flow merging, together with packet sequencing, du | derivedContent="Section 3.2.2"/>). Its peer is DetNet flow | |||
plicate elimination, | replication. | |||
and DetNet flow replication perform | </dd> | |||
packet replication and elimination (<xref target="srvcpr | <dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.11">Packet encoding</dt> | |||
ot"/>). | <dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.12"> As | |||
</t> | part of DetNet service protection, as an alternative to | |||
<t hangText="Packet encoding"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | packet sequencing and flow replication, packet encoding | |||
As part of DetNet service protection, as an alternative | combines the information in multiple DetNet packets, | |||
to packet sequencing | perhaps from different DetNet compound flows, and | |||
and flow replication, packet encoding combines the infor | transmits that information in packets on different DetNet | |||
mation in | member flows. Its peer is packet decoding. | |||
multiple DetNet packets, perhaps from different DetNet c | </dd> | |||
ompound flows, and transmits that | <dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.13">Packet decoding</dt> | |||
information in packets on different DetNet member Flows. | <dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.14"> As | |||
Peers with Packet decoding. | part of DetNet service protection, as an alternative to | |||
</t> | flow merging and duplicate elimination, packet decoding | |||
<t hangText="Packet decoding"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | takes packets from different DetNet member flows and | |||
As part of DetNet service protection, as an alternative | computes from those packets the original DetNet packets | |||
to flow merging and | from the compound flows input to packet encoding. Its | |||
duplicate elimination, packet decoding takes packets fro | peer is packet encoding. | |||
m different DetNet member | </dd> | |||
flows, and computes from those packets the original DetN | <dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.15">Resource allocation</dt> | |||
et packets from the | <dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.16"> | |||
compound flows input to packet encoding. Peers with Pac | The DetNet forwarding sub-layer provides resource | |||
ket encoding. | allocation. See <xref target="QueuingModels" format="default | |||
</t> | " sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.5"/>. The | |||
<t hangText="Resource allocation"><vspace blankLines="0"/> | actual queuing and shaping mechanisms are typically | |||
The DetNet forwarding sub-layer provides resource alloca | provided by the underlying subnet. These can be closely | |||
tion. See <xref target="QueuingModels"/>. | associated with the means of providing paths for DetNet | |||
The actual queuing and shaping mechanisms are typically | flows. The path and the resource allocation are conflated | |||
provided by underlying subnet. | in this figure. | |||
These can be closely associated with the means of provid | </dd> | |||
ing paths | <dt pn="section-4.1.1-4.17">Explicit routes</dt> | |||
for DetNet flows. | <dd pn="section-4.1.1-4.18"> | |||
The path and the resource allocation are conflated in th | Explicit routes are arrangements of fixed paths operated at | |||
is figure. | the DetNet forwarding sub-layer that are determined in advance | |||
</t> | to avoid the impact of network convergence on DetNet flows. | |||
<t hangText="Explicit routes"><vspace bla | </dd> | |||
nkLines="0"/> | </dl> | |||
The DetNet forwarding sub-layer provides mechanisms to e | <t pn="section-4.1.1-5"> | |||
nsure that fixed paths are provided | Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) leverages | |||
for DetNet flows. These explicit paths avoid the impact | in-band and out-of-band signaling that validates whether the | |||
of network convergence. | service is effectively obtained within QoS constraints. OAM is | |||
</t> | not shown in <xref target="ProtStack1" format="default" sectionForma | |||
t="of" derivedContent="Figure 2"/>; it may reside in any | ||||
</list> | number of the layers. OAM can involve specific tagging added in | |||
</t> | the packets for tracing implementation or network configuration | |||
<t> | errors; traceability enables finding whether a packet is a | |||
Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) leverages in-band | replica, which DetNet relay node performed the replication, and | |||
and | which segment was intended for the replica. Active and hybrid OAM | |||
out-of-band signaling that validates whether the service | methods require additional bandwidth to perform fault management | |||
is effectively | and performance monitoring of the DetNet domain. OAM may, for | |||
obtained within QoS constraints. OAM is not shown in | instance, generate special test probes or add OAM information into | |||
<xref target="ProtStack1"/>; it may reside in any number | the data packet. | |||
of the layers. | </t> | |||
OAM can involve specific tagging added in the packets for | <t pn="section-4.1.1-6"> | |||
tracing implementation | The packet replication and elimination functions may be | |||
or network configuration errors; traceability enables to | performed either at the source and destination ends of a | |||
find whether a | DetNet compound flow or in a DetNet relay node. | |||
packet is a replica, which DetNet relay node performed th | </t> | |||
e replication, and which | ||||
segment was intended for the replica. Active and hybrid O | ||||
AM methods require | ||||
additional bandwidth to perform fault management and perf | ||||
ormance monitoring | ||||
of the DetNet domain. OAM may, for instance, generate spe | ||||
cial test probes or | ||||
add OAM information into the data packet. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<t> | ||||
The packet sequencing and replication elimination functions at t | ||||
he | ||||
source and destination ends of a DetNet compound flow may be per | ||||
formed either | ||||
in the end system or in a DetNet relay node. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section title="DetNet Data Plane Overview" anchor="sec_dt_dp"> | <section anchor="sec_dt_dp" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="f | |||
<t> | alse" pn="section-4.1.2"> | |||
A "Deterministic Network" will be composed of DetNet enabled end | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-data-plane-overview">DetNet Data-Plan | |||
systems, DetNet edge nodes, and DetNet relay nodes, which collective | e Overview</name> | |||
ly deliver DetNet | <t pn="section-4.1.2-1"> | |||
services. DetNet relay and edge nodes are interconnected via DetNet | A "Deterministic Network" will be composed of DetNet-enabled end | |||
transit nodes | systems, DetNet edge nodes, and DetNet relay nodes, which | |||
(e.g., LSRs) which support DetNet, but are not DetNet service | collectively deliver DetNet services. DetNet relay and edge nodes | |||
aware. All DetNet nodes are connected to | are interconnected via DetNet transit nodes (e.g., LSRs), which | |||
sub-networks, where a point-to-point link is also considered as a | support DetNet but are not DetNet service aware. All DetNet nodes | |||
simple sub-network. These | are connected to sub-networks, where a point-to-point link is also | |||
sub-networks will provide DetNet compatible service for support of D | considered a simple sub-network. These sub-networks provide | |||
etNet | DetNet-compatible service for support of DetNet traffic. Examples | |||
traffic. Examples of sub-network technologies include MPLS TE, IEEE | of sub-network technologies include MPLS TE, TSN as defined by | |||
802.1 TSN and | IEEE 802.1, and OTN (Optical Transport Network). Of course, | |||
OTN. Of course, multi-layer DetNet systems may also be possible, wh | multilayer DetNet systems may also be possible, where one DetNet | |||
ere | appears as a sub-network and provides service to a higher-layer | |||
one DetNet appears as a sub-network, and provides service to, a high | DetNet system. A simple DetNet concept network is shown in <xref tar | |||
er layer | get="fig_detnet" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 3"/> | |||
DetNet system. A simple DetNet concept network is shown in <xref tar | . | |||
get="fig_detnet"/>. | ||||
Note that in this and following figures "Forwarding" and | Note that in this and following figures, "Forwarding" and "Fwd" refer to the | |||
"Fwd" refer to the DetNet | DetNet forwarding sub-layer, and "Service" and "Svc" refer to the DetNet | |||
forwarding sub-layer, "Service" and "Svc" refer to the De | service sub-layer; both of these sub-layers are described in detail in <xref tar | |||
tNet service sub-layer, | get="StackModel" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.1 | |||
which are described in detail in <xref target="Stacks"/>. | .1"/>. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<figure anchor="fig_detnet" align="center" | <figure anchor="fig_detnet" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="fi | |||
title="A Simple DetNet Enabled Network"> | gure-3"> | |||
<artwork align="center"><![CDATA[ | <name slugifiedName="name-a-simple-detnet-enabled-net">A Simple DetN | |||
et-Enabled Network</name> | ||||
<artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-4.1.2-2.1 | ||||
"> | ||||
TSN Edge Transit Relay DetNet | TSN Edge Transit Relay DetNet | |||
End System Node Node Node End System | End System Node Node Node End System | |||
+----------+ +.........+ +----------+ | +----------+ +.........+ +----------+ | |||
| Appl. |<--:Svc Proxy:-- End to End Service -------->| Appl. | | | Appl. |<--:Svc Proxy:-- End-to-End Service -------->| Appl. | | |||
+----------+ +---------+ +---------+ +----------+ | +----------+ +---------+ +---------+ +----------+ | |||
| TSN | |TSN| |Svc|<- DetNet flow --: Service :-->| Service | | | TSN | |TSN| |Svc|<- DetNet flow --: Service :-->| Service | | |||
+----------+ +---+ +---+ +--------+ +---------+ +----------+ | +----------+ +---+ +---+ +--------+ +---------+ +----------+ | |||
|Forwarding| |Fwd| |Fwd| | Fwd | |Fwd| |Fwd| |Forwarding| | |Forwarding| |Fwd| |Fwd| | Fwd | |Fwd| |Fwd| |Forwarding| | |||
+-------.--+ +-.-+ +-.-+ +--.----.+ +-.-+ +-.-+ +---.------+ | +-------.--+ +-.-+ +-.-+ +--.----.+ +-.-+ +-.-+ +---.------+ | |||
: Link : / ,-----. \ : Link : / ,-----. \ | : Link : / ,-----. \ : Link : / ,-----. \ | |||
+........+ +-[ Sub ]-+ +.......+ +-[ Sub ]-+ | +........+ +-[ Sub- ]-+ +.......+ +-[ Sub- ]-+ | |||
[Network] [Network] | [network] [network] | |||
`-----' `-----' | `-----' `-----' | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t pn="section-4.1.2-3"> | ||||
<t> | DetNet Data Plane is divided into two sub-layers: the DetNet | |||
DetNet data plane is divided into two sub-layers: the DetNet | service sub-layer and the DetNet forwarding sub-layer. This helps | |||
service sub-layer and the DetNet forwarding sub-layer. Th | to explore and evaluate various combinations of the data-plane | |||
is | solutions available. Some of them are illustrated in <xref target="f | |||
helps to explore and evaluate various combinations of the | ig_adaptation" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 4"/>. | |||
data | This separation of DetNet sub-layers, | |||
plane solutions available. Some of them are illustrated i | while helpful, should not be considered a formal requirement. | |||
n | For example, some technologies may violate these strict sub-layers | |||
<xref target="fig_adaptation"/>. This separation of DetN | and still be able to deliver a DetNet service. | |||
et | ||||
sub-layers, while helpful, should not be considered as fo | ||||
rmal | ||||
requirement. For example, some technologies may violate | ||||
these | ||||
strict sub-layers and still be able to deliver a DetNet s | ||||
ervice. | ||||
</t> | </t> | |||
<figure anchor="fig_adaptation" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn | ||||
<figure anchor="fig_adaptation" align="center" | ="figure-4"> | |||
title="DetNet adaptation to data plane"> | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-adaptation-to-data-p">DetNet Adapta | |||
<artwork align="center"><![CDATA[ | tion to Data Plane</name> | |||
<artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-4.1.2-4.1 | ||||
"> | ||||
. | . | |||
. | . | |||
+-----------------------------+ | +-----------------------------+ | |||
| DetNet Service sub-layer | PW, UDP, GRE | | DetNet Service sub-layer | PW, UDP, GRE | |||
+-----------------------------+ | +-----------------------------+ | |||
| DetNet Forwarding sub-layer | IPv6, IPv4, MPLS TE LSPs, MPLS SR | | DetNet Forwarding sub-layer | IPv6, IPv4, MPLS TE LSPs, MPLS SR | |||
+-----------------------------+ | +-----------------------------+ | |||
. | . | |||
. | . | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-4.1.2-5"> | |||
In some networking scenarios, the end system initially provides a De | In some networking scenarios, the end system initially provides a | |||
tNet | DetNet flow encapsulation, which contains all information needed | |||
flow encapsulation, which contains all information needed by DetNet | by DetNet nodes (e.g., DetNet flow based on the Real-time Transport | |||
nodes | Protocol (RTP) <xref target="RFC3550" format="default" sectionFormat | |||
(e.g., Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) <xref target="RFC3550"/> b | ="of" derivedContent="RFC3550"/> that is carried over a | |||
ased | native UDP/IP network or pseudowire (PW)). In other scenarios, the | |||
DetNet flow carried over a native UDP/IP network or PseudoWire). In | encapsulation formats might differ significantly. | |||
other scenarios, the encapsulation formats might differ significantl | ||||
y. | ||||
</t> | </t> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-4.1.2-6"> | |||
There are many valid options to create a data plane solution for Det | There are many valid options to create a data-plane solution for Det | |||
Net | Net | |||
traffic by selecting a technology approach for the DetNet service su b-layer and | traffic by selecting a technology approach for the DetNet service su b-layer and | |||
also selecting a technology approach for the DetNet forwarding sub-l ayer. There are | also selecting a technology approach for the DetNet forwarding sub-l ayer. There are | |||
a large number of valid combinations. | a large number of valid combinations. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-4.1.2-7"> | |||
One of the most fundamental differences between different potential | One of the most fundamental differences between different | |||
data plane options is the basic headers used by DetNet | potential data-plane options is the basic headers used by DetNet | |||
nodes. For example, the basic service can be delivered based on an | nodes. For example, the basic service can be delivered based on | |||
MPLS label | an MPLS label or an IP header. This decision impacts the basic | |||
or an IP header. This decision impacts the basic forwardi | forwarding logic for the DetNet service sub-layer. Note that in | |||
ng logic for the DetNet | both cases, IP addresses are used to address DetNet nodes. The | |||
service sub-layer. Note that in both cases, IP addresses | selected DetNet forwarding sub-layer technology also needs to be | |||
are used to address DetNet nodes. | mapped to the subnet technology used to interconnect DetNet | |||
The selected DetNet forwarding sub-layer technology also needs to | nodes. For example, DetNet flows will need to be mapped to TSN | |||
be mapped to the sub-net | Streams. | |||
technology used to interconnect DetNet nodes. For example | ||||
, DetNet flows will need to | ||||
be mapped to TSN Streams. | ||||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="netref" title="Network reference model"> | <section anchor="netref" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fals | |||
e" pn="section-4.1.3"> | ||||
<t> <xref target="fig_DetNetservice"/> shows another view of the | <name slugifiedName="name-network-reference-model">Network Reference M | |||
DetNet service related reference points and main componen | odel</name> | |||
ts. | <t pn="section-4.1.3-1"><xref target="fig_DetNetservice" format="defau | |||
</t> | lt" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 5"/> shows another view of the | |||
DetNet service-related reference points and main componen | ||||
<figure anchor="fig_DetNetservice" align="center" | ts. | |||
title="DetNet Service Reference Model (multi-domain)"> | </t> | |||
<artwork><![CDATA[ | <figure anchor="fig_DetNetservice" align="left" suppress-title="false" | |||
pn="figure-5"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-detnet-service-reference-mo">DetNet Servic | ||||
e Reference Model (Multidomain)</name> | ||||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.1.3-2.1"> | ||||
DetNet DetNet | DetNet DetNet | |||
end system end system | End System End System | |||
_ _ | _ _ | |||
/ \ +----DetNet-UNI (U) / \ | / \ +----DetNet-UNI (U) / \ | |||
/App\ | /App\ | /App\ | /App\ | |||
/-----\ | /-----\ | /-----\ | /-----\ | |||
| NIC | v ________ | NIC | | | NIC | v ________ | NIC | | |||
+--+--+ _____ / \ DetNet-UNI (U) --+ +--+--+ | +--+--+ _____ / \ DetNet-UNI (U) --+ +--+--+ | |||
| / \__/ \ | | | | / \__/ \ | | | |||
| / +----+ +----+ \_____ | | | | / +----+ +----+ \_____ | | | |||
| / | | | | \_______ | | | | / | | | | \_______ | | | |||
+------U PE +----+ P +----+ \ _ v | | +------U PE +----+ P +----+ \ _ v | | |||
| | | | | | | ___/ \ | | | | | | | | | ___/ \ | | |||
| +--+-+ +----+ | +----+ | / \_ | | | +--+-+ +----+ | +----+ | / \_ | | |||
\ | | | | | / \ | | \ | | | | | / \ | | |||
\ | +----+ +--+-+ +--+PE |------ U-----+ | \ | +----+ +--+-+ +--+PE |------ U-----+ | |||
\ | | | | | | | | | \_ _/ | \ | | | | | | | | | \_ _/ | |||
\ +---+ P +----+ P +--+ +----+ | \____/ | \ +---+ P +----+ P +--+ +----+ | \____/ | |||
\___ | | | | / | \___ | | | | / | |||
\ +----+__ +----+ DetNet-1 DetNet-2 | \ +----+__ +----+ DetNet-1 DetNet-2 | |||
| \_____/ \___________/ | | | \_____/ \___________/ | | |||
| | | | | | |||
| | End-to-End service | | | | | | | End-to-End Service | | | | | |||
<-------------------------------------------------------------> | <-------------------------------------------------------------> | |||
| | DetNet service | | | | | | | DetNet Service | | | | | |||
| <------------------------------------------------> | | | <------------------------------------------------> | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t pn="section-4.1.3-3">DetNet User-to-Network Interfaces (DetNet-UNIs | ||||
<t>DetNet User Network Interfaces (DetNet-UNIs) ("U" in <xref target | ) ("U" in <xref target="fig_DetNetservice" format="default" sectionFormat="of" d | |||
="fig_DetNetservice"/>) are assumed in this document to be packet-based referenc | erivedContent="Figure 5"/>) are assumed in this document to be | |||
e points and provide connectivity over the packet network. A DetNet-UNI may prov | packet-based reference points and provide connectivity over the | |||
ide multiple functions, e.g., it may add networking technology specific encapsul | packet network. A DetNet-UNI may provide multiple functions. For | |||
ation to the DetNet flows if necessary; it may provide status of the availabilit | example, it may: | |||
y of the resources associated with a reservation; it may provide a synchronizati | </t> | |||
on service for the end system; it may carry enough signaling to place the reserv | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.1.3-4"> | |||
ation in a network without a controller, or if the controller only deals with th | <li pn="section-4.1.3-4.1">add encapsulation specific to networking | |||
e network but not the end systems. Internal reference points of end systems (bet | technology to the DetNet flows if necessary, | |||
ween the application and the NIC) are more challenging from control perspective | </li> | |||
and they may have extra requirements (e.g., in-order delivery is expected in end | <li pn="section-4.1.3-4.2">provide status of the availability of the | |||
system internal reference points, whereas it is considered optional over the De | resources associated with a reservation, | |||
tNet-UNI).</t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.1.3-4.3">provide a synchronization service for the | ||||
end system, or | ||||
</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-4.1.3-4.4">carry enough signaling to place the reser | ||||
vation in a network without a | ||||
controller or in a network where the controller only deals with the network | ||||
but not the end systems. | ||||
</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
<t pn="section-4.1.3-5"> | ||||
Internal reference points of end systems (between the application | ||||
and the Network Interface Card (NIC)) are more challenging from the | ||||
control perspective, and they may have extra requirements (e.g., | ||||
in-order delivery is expected in end system internal reference | ||||
points, whereas it is considered optional over the DetNet-UNI).</t> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="netrefsys" title="DetNet systems"> | <section anchor="netrefsys" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fal | |||
<section anchor="es" title="End system"> | se" pn="section-4.2"> | |||
<t> | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-systems">DetNet Systems</name> | |||
The traffic characteristics of an App-flow can be CBR (constant b | <section anchor="es" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" p | |||
it rate) or VBR (variable bit rate) and can have Layer-1 or Layer-2 or Layer-3 e | n="section-4.2.1"> | |||
ncapsulation (e.g., TDM (time-division multiplexing), Ethernet, IP). These chara | <name slugifiedName="name-end-system">End System</name> | |||
cteristics are considered as input for resource reservation and might be simplif | <t pn="section-4.2.1-1"> | |||
ied to ensure determinism during packet forwarding (e.g., making reservations fo | The traffic characteristics of an App-flow can be CBR | |||
r the peak rate of VBR traffic, etc.). | (constant bit rate) or VBR (variable bit rate) and can have | |||
</t> | Layer 1, Layer 2, or Layer 3 encapsulation (e.g., TDM | |||
(time-division multiplexing) Ethernet, IP). These | ||||
<t> | characteristics are considered as input for resource | |||
An end system may or may not be DetNet forwarding sub-layer aware | reservation and might be simplified to ensure determinism | |||
or DetNet service sub-layer aware. That is, an end system may or may not contai | during packet forwarding (e.g., making reservations for the | |||
n DetNet specific functionality. End systems with DetNet functionalities may hav | peak rate of VBR traffic, etc.). | |||
e the same or different forwarding sub-layer as the connected DetNet domain. Cat | </t> | |||
egorization of end systems are shown in <xref target="fig_endsys2"/>. | <t pn="section-4.2.1-2"> | |||
</t> | An end system may or may not be aware of the DetNet forwarding su | |||
b-layer | ||||
<figure anchor="fig_endsys2" align="center" | or DetNet service sub-layer. That is, an end | |||
title="Categorization of end systems"> | system may or may not contain DetNet-specific | |||
<artwork><![CDATA[ | functionality. End systems with DetNet functionalities may | |||
have the same or different forwarding sub-layer as the | ||||
connected DetNet domain. Categorization of end systems are | ||||
shown in <xref target="fig_endsys2" format="default" sectionForma | ||||
t="of" derivedContent="Figure 6"/>. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<figure anchor="fig_endsys2" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="f | ||||
igure-6"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-categorization-of-end-syste">Categorizatio | ||||
n of End Systems</name> | ||||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.2.1-3.1"> | ||||
End system | End system | |||
| | | | |||
| | | | |||
| DetNet aware ? | | DetNet aware ? | |||
/ \ | / \ | |||
+------< >------+ | +------< >------+ | |||
NO | \ / | YES | NO | \ / | YES | |||
| v | | | v | | |||
DetNet unaware | | DetNet-unaware | | |||
End system | | End system | | |||
| Service/Forwarding | | Service/Forwarding | |||
| sub-layer | | sub-layer | |||
/ \ aware ? | / \ aware ? | |||
+--------< >-------------+ | +--------< >-------------+ | |||
f-aware | \ / | s-aware | f-aware | \ / | s-aware | |||
| v | | | v | | |||
| | both | | | | both | | |||
| | | | | | | | |||
DetNet f-aware | DetNet s-aware | DetNet f-aware | DetNet s-aware | |||
End system | End system | End system | End system | |||
v | v | |||
DetNet sf-aware | DetNet sf-aware | |||
End system | End system | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t pn="section-4.2.1-4"> | ||||
<t> | The following are some known use case examples for end systems: | |||
Note some known use case examples for end systems: | </t> | |||
<list style="symbols"> | <dl spacing="normal" newline="true" indent="3" pn="section-4.2.1-5"> | |||
<t> DetNet unaware: The classic case requiring service pr | <dt pn="section-4.2.1-5.1">DetNet unaware</dt> | |||
oxies.</t> | <dd pn="section-4.2.1-5.2"> The classic case requiring service proxi | |||
<t> DetNet f-aware: A DetNet forwarding sub-layer aware s | es.</dd> | |||
ystem. It knows about some TSN functions (e.g., reservation), but not about serv | <dt pn="section-4.2.1-5.3">DetNet f-aware</dt> | |||
ice protection. </t> | <dd pn="section-4.2.1-5.4">A system that is aware of the DetNet forw | |||
<t> DetNet s-aware: A DetNet service sub-layer aware syst | arding | |||
em. It supplies sequence numbers, but doesn't know about resource allocation. </ | sub-layer. It knows about some TSN | |||
t> | functions (e.g., reservation) but not about service | |||
<t> DetNet sf-aware: A full functioning DetNet end system | protection. </dd> | |||
, it has DetNet functionalities and usually the same forwarding paradigm as the | <dt pn="section-4.2.1-5.5">DetNet s-aware</dt> | |||
connected DetNet domain. It can be treated as an integral part of the DetNet dom | <dd pn="section-4.2.1-5.6"> A system that is aware of the DetNet ser | |||
ain. </t> | vice | |||
</list> | sub-layer. It supplies sequence numbers but | |||
</t> | doesn't know about resource allocation. </dd> | |||
</section> | <dt pn="section-4.2.1-5.7">DetNet sf-aware</dt> | |||
<section anchor="ertn" title="DetNet edge, relay, and transit nodes"> | <dd pn="section-4.2.1-5.8">A fully functioning DetNet end | |||
<t> | system. It has DetNet functionalities and usually the | |||
As shown in <xref target="fig_detnet"/>, DetNet edge nodes providing | same forwarding paradigm as the connected DetNet | |||
proxy | domain. It can be treated as an integral part of the | |||
service and DetNet relay nodes providing the DetNet service sub-laye | DetNet domain. </dd> | |||
r are | </dl> | |||
DetNet-aware, and DetNet transit nodes need only be aware of the Det | </section> | |||
Net | <section anchor="ertn" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" | |||
forwarding sub-layer. | pn="section-4.2.2"> | |||
</t><t> | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-edge-relay-and-trans">DetNet Edge, Re | |||
In general, if a DetNet flow passes through one or more DetNet-unawa | lay, and Transit Nodes</name> | |||
re | <t pn="section-4.2.2-1"> | |||
network nodes between two DetNet nodes providing the DetNet forwardi | As shown in <xref target="fig_detnet" format="default" sectionFormat | |||
ng sub-layer | ="of" derivedContent="Figure 3"/>, DetNet edge nodes | |||
for that flow, there is a potential for disruption or failure of the | providing proxy service and DetNet relay nodes providing the | |||
DetNet QoS. A network administrator needs to ensure that the DetNet | DetNet service sub-layer are DetNet aware, and DetNet transit | |||
-unaware | nodes need only be aware of the DetNet forwarding sub-layer. | |||
network nodes are configured to minimize the chances of packet loss | </t> | |||
and | <t pn="section-4.2.2-2"> In general, if a DetNet flow passes through o | |||
delay, and provision enough extra buffer space in the DetNet transit | ne or more | |||
node | DetNet-unaware network nodes between two DetNet nodes providing | |||
following the DetNet-unaware network nodes to absorb the induced lat | the DetNet forwarding sub-layer for that flow, there is a | |||
ency | potential for disruption or failure of the DetNet QoS. A network | |||
variations. | administrator needs to 1) ensure that the DetNet-unaware network | |||
nodes are configured to minimize the chances of packet loss and | ||||
delay and 2) provision enough extra buffer space in the DetNet | ||||
transit node following the DetNet-unaware network nodes to absorb | ||||
the induced latency variations. | ||||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="DetNetFlows" title="DetNet flows"> | <section anchor="DetNetFlows" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="f | |||
alse" pn="section-4.3"> | ||||
<section anchor="DetNetFlowsTypes" title="DetNet flow types"> | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-flows">DetNet Flows</name> | |||
<t> | <section anchor="DetNetFlowsTypes" numbered="true" toc="include" removeI | |||
A DetNet flow can have different formats while its p | nRFC="false" pn="section-4.3.1"> | |||
ackets are | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-flow-types">DetNet Flow Types</name> | |||
forwarded between the peer end systems depending | <t pn="section-4.3.1-1"> | |||
on the type | A DetNet flow can have different formats while its packets are forwarded | |||
of the end systems. Corresponding to the end sys | between the peer end systems depending on the type of the end | |||
tem types, | systems. Corresponding to the end system types, the following possible | |||
the following possible types / formats of a DetN | types/formats of a DetNet flow are distinguished in this document. The | |||
et flow are | different flow types have different requirements to DetNet nodes. | |||
distinguished in this document. The different fl | </t> | |||
ow types have | <dl spacing="normal" newline="true" indent="3" pn="section-4.3.1-2"> | |||
different requirements to DetNet nodes. | <dt pn="section-4.3.1-2.1">App-flow</dt> | |||
<list style="symbols"> | <dd pn="section-4.3.1-2.2">The payload (data) carried over a DetNet | |||
<t> App-flow: the payload (data) carried over a DetNet flow | flow between DetNet-unaware end systems. An App-flow does | |||
between DetNet unaware end systems. An | not contain any DetNet-related attributes and does not | |||
app-flow does not | imply any specific requirement on DetNet nodes.</dd> | |||
contain any DetNet related attributes a | <dt pn="section-4.3.1-2.3">DetNet-f-flow</dt> | |||
nd does not imply any | <dd pn="section-4.3.1-2.4">The specific format of a DetNet flow. It | |||
specific requirement on DetNet nodes.</ | only requires the resource allocation features provided by | |||
t> | the DetNet forwarding sub-layer. </dd> | |||
<t> DetNet-f-flow: specific format of a DetNet flow. It only | <dt pn="section-4.3.1-2.5">DetNet-s-flow</dt> | |||
requires the resource allocation features provided by the DetNet forwarding sub | <dd pn="section-4.3.1-2.6">The specific format of a DetNet flow. It | |||
-layer. </t> | only requires the service protection feature ensured by | |||
<t> DetNet-s-flow: specific format of a DetNet flow. It onl | the DetNet service sub-layer. </dd> | |||
y requires the service protection feature ensured by the DetNet service sub-laye | <dt pn="section-4.3.1-2.7"> DetNet-sf-flow</dt> | |||
r. </t> | <dd pn="section-4.3.1-2.8">The specific format of a DetNet | |||
<t> DetNet-sf-flow: specific format of a DetNet flow. It re | flow. It requires both the DetNet service sub-layer and | |||
quires both DetNet service | the DetNet forwarding sub-layer functions during | |||
sub-layer and DetNet forwarding sub-layer functions du | forwarding. </dd> | |||
ring forwarding. </t> | </dl> | |||
</list> | </section> | |||
</t> | <section anchor="FlowLimits" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC=" | |||
</section> | false" pn="section-4.3.2"> | |||
<name slugifiedName="name-source-transmission-behavio">Source Transmis | ||||
<section anchor="FlowLimits" title="Source transmission behavior"> | sion Behavior</name> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-4.3.2-1"> | |||
For the purposes of resource allocation, | For the purposes of resource allocation, | |||
DetNet flows can be synchronous or asynchronous. | DetNet flows can be synchronous or asynchronous. | |||
In synchronous DetNet flows, at least the DetNet nodes (and po ssibly | In synchronous DetNet flows, at least the DetNet nodes (and po ssibly | |||
the end systems) are closely time | the end systems) are closely time | |||
synchronized, typically to better than 1 microsecond. By tran smitting | synchronized, typically to better than 1 microsecond. By tran smitting | |||
packets from different DetNet flows or classes of DetNet flows at different times, | packets from different DetNet flows or classes of DetNet flows at different times, | |||
using repeating schedules synchronized among the DetNet nodes, resources | using repeating schedules synchronized among the DetNet nodes, resources | |||
such as buffers and link bandwidth can be shared over the time domain | such as buffers and link bandwidth can be shared over the time domain | |||
among different DetNet flows. There is a tradeoff among techn iques for | among different DetNet flows. There is a trade-off among tech niques for | |||
synchronous DetNet flows between the burden of fine-grained sc heduling and the | synchronous DetNet flows between the burden of fine-grained sc heduling and the | |||
benefit of reducing the required resources, especially buffer space. | benefit of reducing the required resources, especially buffer space. | |||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
<t pn="section-4.3.2-2"> | ||||
In contrast, asynchronous DetNet flows are not coordinated wit h a fine-grained | In contrast, asynchronous DetNet flows are not coordinated wit h a fine-grained | |||
schedule, so relay and end systems must assume worst-case inte rference | schedule, so relay and end systems must assume worst-case inte rference | |||
among DetNet flows contending for buffer resources. | among DetNet flows contending for buffer resources. | |||
Asynchronous DetNet flows are characterized by: | Asynchronous DetNet flows are characterized by: | |||
<list style="symbols"> | </t> | |||
<t> | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.3.2-3"> | |||
<li pn="section-4.3.2-3.1"> | ||||
A maximum packet size; | A maximum packet size; | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.3.2-3.2"> | ||||
An observation interval; and | An observation interval; and | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.3.2-3.3"> | ||||
A maximum number of transmissions during that observat ion interval. | A maximum number of transmissions during that observat ion interval. | |||
</t> | </li> | |||
</list> | </ul> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-4.3.2-4"> These parameters, together with knowledge of | |||
These parameters, together with knowledge of the protocol stac | the | |||
k used (and thus the | protocol stack used (and thus the size of the various headers | |||
size of the various headers added to a packet), provide the ba | added to a packet), provide the bandwidth that is needed for the | |||
ndwidth that is needed for the DetNet flow. | DetNet flow. </t> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-4.3.2-5"> The source is required not to exceed these | |||
The source is required not to exceed these limits in order to | limits in order to obtain DetNet service. If the source | |||
obtain DetNet service. If the source | transmits less data than this limit allows, then the unused resour | |||
transmits less data than this limit allows, the unused resourc | ce, | |||
e such as link | such as link bandwidth, can be made available by the DetNet | |||
bandwidth can be made available by the DetNet system to non-De | system to non-DetNet packets as long as all guarantees are | |||
tNet packets as long as all guarantees are fulfilled. However, | fulfilled. However, making those resources available to DetNet | |||
making those resources available to DetNet packets in other De | packets in other DetNet flows would serve no purpose. Those | |||
tNet flows would serve | other DetNet flows have their own dedicated resources, on the | |||
no purpose. Those other DetNet flows have their own dedicated | assumption that all DetNet flows can use all of their resources | |||
resources, on the | over a long period of time. | |||
assumption that all DetNet flows can use all of their resource | ||||
s over a long | ||||
period of time. | ||||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
There is no expectation in DetNet for App-flows to be responsi | <t pn="section-4.3.2-6"> | |||
ve to congestion control <xref target="RFC2914"/> or explicit congestion notific | There is no expectation in DetNet for App-flows to be responsive to | |||
ation <xref target="RFC3168"/>. The assumption | congestion control <xref target="RFC2914" format="default" sectionFormat="o | |||
is that a DetNet flow, to be useful, must be delivered in its | f" derivedContent="RFC2914"/> or explicit congestion | |||
entirety. That | notification <xref target="RFC3168" format="default" sectionFormat="of" der | |||
is, while any useful application is written to expect a certai | ivedContent="RFC3168"/>. The assumption is that a DetNet | |||
n number of lost | flow, to be useful, must be delivered in its entirety. That is, while | |||
packets, the real-time applications of interest to DetNet dema | any useful application is written to expect a certain number of lost | |||
nd that the loss of | packets, the real-time applications of interest to DetNet demand that the | |||
data due to the network is a rare event. | loss of data due to the network is a rare event. </t> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-4.3.2-7"> Although DetNet strives to minimize the chang | |||
Although DetNet strives to minimize the changes required of an | es required of an | |||
application to | application to allow it to shift from a special-purpose digital network to an | |||
allow it to shift from a special-purpose digital network to an | Internet Protocol network, one fundamental shift in the behavior of network | |||
Internet Protocol | applications is impossible to avoid: the reservation of resources before the | |||
network, one fundamental shift in | application starts. In the first place, a network cannot deliver finite | |||
the behavior of network applications is impossible to avoid: t | latency and practically zero packet loss to an arbitrarily high offered load. | |||
he reservation | Secondly, achieving practically zero packet loss for DetNet flows means that | |||
of resources before the application starts. | DetNet nodes have to dedicate buffer resources to specific DetNet flows or to | |||
In the first place, a network cannot deliver finite latency an | classes of DetNet flows. The requirements of each reservation have to be | |||
d practically zero | translated into the parameters that control each DetNet system's queuing, | |||
packet loss to an arbitrarily high offered load. Secondly, ac | shaping, and scheduling functions, and they have to be delivered to the DetNet | |||
hieving | nodes and end | |||
practically zero packet loss for DetNet flows | systems. </t> | |||
means that DetNet nodes have to dedicate buffer resources to s | <t pn="section-4.3.2-8"> All nodes in a DetNet domain are expected to | |||
pecific | support the data behavior | |||
DetNet flows or to classes of DetNet flows. The requirements | required to deliver a particular DetNet service. If a node itself is not | |||
of each reservation have to be | DetNet service aware, the DetNet nodes that are adjacent to them must ensure | |||
translated into the parameters that control each DetNet system | that the node that is non-DetNet aware is provisioned to appropriately support | |||
's | the DetNet service. For example, a TSN node (as defined by IEEE 802.1) may be us | |||
queuing, shaping, and scheduling functions and delivered to th | ed to | |||
e DetNet nodes and end systems. | interconnect DetNet-aware nodes, and these DetNet nodes can map DetNet flows | |||
</t><t> | to 802.1 TSN flows. As another example, an MPLS-TE or MPLS-TP (Transport Profile | |||
All nodes in a DetNet domain are expected to suppor | ) domain may be used to | |||
t the data | interconnect DetNet-aware nodes, and these DetNet nodes can map DetNet flows | |||
behavior required to deliver a particular DetNe | to TE LSPs, which can provide the QoS requirements of the DetNet service. | |||
t service. If | </t> | |||
a node itself is not DetNet service aware, the | </section> | |||
DetNet nodes | <section anchor="Incomplete" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC=" | |||
that are adjacent to such non-DetNet aware node | false" pn="section-4.3.3"> | |||
s must ensure | <name slugifiedName="name-incomplete-networks">Incomplete Networks</na | |||
that the non-DetNet aware node is provisioned t | me> | |||
o appropriately | <t pn="section-4.3.3-1"> | |||
support the DetNet service. For example, an IEE | The presence in the network of intermediate nodes or subnets | |||
E 802.1 TSN | that are not fully capable of offering DetNet services | |||
node may be used to interconnect DetNet aware n | complicates the ability of the intermediate nodes and/or | |||
odes, and these | controller to allocate resources, as extra buffering must be | |||
DetNet nodes can map DetNet flows to 802.1 TSN | allocated at points downstream from the non-DetNet | |||
flows. Another | intermediate node for a DetNet flow. This extra buffering | |||
example, an MPLS-TE or TP domain may be used to | may increase latency and/or jitter. | |||
interconnect | </t> | |||
DetNet aware nodes, and these DetNet nodes can | </section> | |||
map DetNet | ||||
flows to TE LSPs which can provide the QoS requ | ||||
irements of the | ||||
DetNet service. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="Incomplete" title="Incomplete Networks"> | ||||
<t> | ||||
The presence in the network of intermediate nodes or subnets t | ||||
hat are not fully capable of offering | ||||
DetNet services complicates the ability of the intermediate no | ||||
des and/or controller to | ||||
allocate resources, | ||||
as extra buffering must be allocated at points | ||||
downstream from the non-DetNet intermediate node | ||||
for a DetNet flow. This extra buffering may inc | ||||
rease latency and/or jitter. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="te" title="Traffic Engineering for DetNet"> | <section anchor="te" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn= | |||
<t> | "section-4.4"> | |||
<xref target="TEAS">Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling (TEA | <name slugifiedName="name-traffic-engineering-for-det">Traffic Engineeri | |||
S) | ng for DetNet</name> | |||
</xref> defines traffic-engineering architectures for generic applicabi | <t pn="section-4.4-1"><xref target="TEAS" format="default" sectionFormat | |||
lity | ="of" derivedContent="TEAS">Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling (TEAS | |||
across packet and non-packet networks. | ) | |||
</xref> defines traffic-engineering architectures for generic applicab | ||||
ility | ||||
across packet and nonpacket networks. | ||||
From a TEAS perspective, Traffic Engineering (TE) refers to techniques | From a TEAS perspective, Traffic Engineering (TE) refers to techniques | |||
that enable operators to control how specific traffic flows are treated | that enable operators to control how specific traffic flows are treated | |||
within their networks. | within their networks. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-4.4-2"> | |||
Because if its very nature of establishing explicit optimized paths, | Because of its very nature of establishing explicit optimized paths, | |||
Deterministic Networking can be seen as a new, specialized branch of | DetNet can be seen as a new, specialized branch of | |||
Traffic Engineering, and inherits its architecture with a separation | TE, and it inherits its architecture with a separation | |||
into planes. | into planes. | |||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
The Deterministic Networking architecture is thus composed | <t pn="section-4.4-3"> | |||
of three planes, a (User) Application Plane, a Controller Plane, and a | The DetNet architecture is thus composed of three planes: a (User) | |||
Network Plane, which echoes that of Figure 1 of | Application Plane, a Controller Plane, and a Network Plane. This | |||
<xref target="RFC7426"> Software-Defined Networking (SDN): | echoes the composition of Figure 1 of <xref target="RFC7426" format="de | |||
Layers and Architecture Terminology</xref>, and the Controllers | fault" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7426">"Software-Defined Networking | |||
identified in <xref target="RFC8453"/> and <xref target="RFC7149 | (SDN): Layers and | |||
"/>. | Architecture Terminology"</xref> and the controllers identified in | |||
</t> | <xref target="RFC8453" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedConte | |||
nt="RFC8453"/> and <xref target="RFC7149" format="default" sectionFormat="of" de | ||||
<section anchor="appplane" title="The Application Plane"> | rivedContent="RFC7149"/>. | |||
<t> | </t> | |||
Per <xref target="RFC7426"/>, | <section anchor="appplane" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fa | |||
lse" pn="section-4.4.1"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-the-application-plane">The Application Plane | ||||
</name> | ||||
<t pn="section-4.4.1-1"> | ||||
Per <xref target="RFC7426" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedC | ||||
ontent="RFC7426"/>, | ||||
the Application Plane includes both applications and services. In parti cular, | the Application Plane includes both applications and services. In parti cular, | |||
the Application Plane incorporates the User Agent, a specialized applic ation | the Application Plane incorporates the User Agent, a specialized applic ation | |||
that interacts with the end user / operator and performs requests for | that interacts with the end user and operator and performs requests for | |||
Deterministic Networking services via an abstract Flow Management Entit | DetNet services via an abstract Flow Management Entity | |||
y, | (FME), which may or may not be collocated with (one of) the end systems | |||
(FME) which may or may not be collocated with (one of) the end systems. | . | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<t>At the Application Plane, a management interface enables the n | <t pn="section-4.4.1-2">At the Application Plane, a management interfa | |||
egotiation of flows between end | ce enables | |||
systems. An abstraction of the flow called a Traffic Spec | the negotiation of flows between end systems. An abstraction | |||
ification (TSpec) provides the | of the flow called a Traffic Specification (TSpec) provides | |||
representation. This abstraction is used to place a reser | the representation. This abstraction is used to place a | |||
vation over the (Northbound) Service | reservation over the (Northbound) Service Interface and within | |||
Interface and within the Application plane. | the Application Plane. It is associated with an abstraction | |||
It is associated with an abstraction of location, such as IP addresses | of location, such as IP addresses and DNS names, to identify | |||
and DNS | the end systems and possibly specify DetNet nodes. | |||
names, to identify the end systems and possibly specify D | </t> | |||
etNet nodes. | </section> | |||
</t> | <section anchor="ctrlplane" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="f | |||
</section> | alse" pn="section-4.4.2"> | |||
<section anchor="ctrlplane" title="The Controller Plane"> | <name slugifiedName="name-the-controller-plane">The Controller Plane</ | |||
<t> | name> | |||
The Controller Plane corresponds to the aggregation of the Control and | <t pn="section-4.4.2-1"> | |||
Management Planes in <xref target="RFC7426"/>, though | The Controller Plane corresponds to the aggregation of the Control | |||
Common Control and Measurement Plane (CCAMP) <xref target="CCAMP"/> | and Management Planes in <xref target="RFC7426" format="default" sectio | |||
makes an additional distinction between management and measurement. | nFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7426"/>, though Common | |||
When the logical separation of the Control, Measurement and other | Control and Measurement Plane (CCAMP) (as defined by the CCAMP | |||
Management entities is not relevant, the term Controller Plane is used | Working Group <xref target="CCAMP" format="default" sectionFormat="of" d | |||
for simplicity to represent them all, and the term Controller Plane Fun | erivedContent="CCAMP"/>) makes an | |||
ction (CPF) refers to | additional distinction between management and measurement. When the | |||
any device operating in that plane, whether is it a Path Computation | logical separation of the Control, Measurement, and other Management | |||
Element (PCE) <xref target="RFC4655"/>, or a Network Management entity | entities is not relevant, the term "Controller Plane" is used for | |||
(NME), or a distributed control plane. | simplicity to represent them all, and the term "Controller Plane | |||
The CPF is a core | Function (CPF)" refers to any device operating in that plane, whether | |||
element of a controller, in charge of computing Deterministic paths | it is a Path Computation Element (PCE) <xref target="RFC4655" format="d | |||
to be applied in the Network Plane. | efault" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4655"/>, a | |||
</t> | Network Management Entity (NME), or a distributed control protocol. | |||
<t> | ||||
The CPF is a core element of a controller, in charge of computing | ||||
deterministic paths to be applied in the Network Plane. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<t pn="section-4.4.2-2"> | ||||
A (Northbound) Service Interface enables applications in the Applicatio n | A (Northbound) Service Interface enables applications in the Applicatio n | |||
Plane to communicate with the entities in the Controller Plane as | Plane to communicate with the entities in the Controller Plane as | |||
illustrated in <xref target="NorthSouth"/>. | illustrated in <xref target="NorthSouth" format="default" sectio | |||
</t> | nFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 7"/>. | |||
<t> | </t> | |||
One or more CPF(s) collaborate to implement the requests from the FME | <t pn="section-4.4.2-3"> | |||
as Per-Flow Per-Hop Behaviors installed in the DetNet nod | One or more CPFs collaborate to implement the requests from the FME | |||
es for | as per-flow, per-hop behaviors installed in the DetNet nodes for each | |||
each individual flow. The CPFs | individual flow. The CPFs place each flow along a deterministic | |||
place each flow along a deterministic sequence of DetNet nodes so as | arrangement of DetNet nodes so as to respect per-flow constraints such | |||
to respect per-flow constraints such as security and | as security and latency, and to optimize the overall result for metrics | |||
latency, and optimize the overall result for metrics such | such as an abstract aggregated cost. The deterministic arrangement can | |||
as an | typically be more complex than a direct arrangement and include | |||
abstract aggregated cost. The deterministic sequence can typically be | redundant paths with one or more packet replication and elimination | |||
more complex than a direct sequence and include redundant paths, with | points. Scaling to larger networks is discussed in <xref target="Scalin | |||
one or more packet replication and elimination points. Scaling to large | g" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.9"/>. | |||
r | </t> | |||
networks is discussed in <xref target="Scaling"/>. | </section> | |||
</t> | <section anchor="netplane" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fa | |||
</section> | lse" pn="section-4.4.3"> | |||
<section anchor="netplane" title="The Network Plane"><t> | <name slugifiedName="name-the-network-plane">The Network Plane</name> | |||
The Network Plane represents the network devices and protocols as a | <t pn="section-4.4.3-1"> | |||
whole, regardless of the Layer at which the network devices operate. | ||||
It includes Forwarding Plane (data plane), Application, and | The Network Plane represents the network devices and protocols as a whole, | |||
Operational Plane (e.g., OAM) aspects. | regardless of the layer at which the network devices operate. It includes the | |||
</t> | Data Plane and Operational Plane (e.g., OAM) aspects. | |||
<t> | </t> | |||
The network Plane comprises the Network Interface Cards (NIC) in the | <t pn="section-4.4.3-2">The Network Plane comprises the Network Interf | |||
end systems, which are typically IP hosts, | ace Cards (NICs) in the | |||
and DetNet nodes, which are typically IP routers and MPLS switches. | end systems, which are typically IP hosts, and DetNet nodes, which | |||
Network-to-Network Interfaces such as used for Traffic Engineering | are typically IP routers and MPLS switches. | |||
path reservation in <xref target="RFC5921"/>, | </t> | |||
as well as User-to-Network Interfaces (UNI) such as provided by | <t pn="section-4.4.3-3"> | |||
the Local Management Interface (LMI) between network and end systems, | ||||
are both part of the Network Plane, both in the control plane and | ||||
the data plane. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<t> | ||||
A Southbound (Network) Interface enables the entities in the Controller | A Southbound (Network) Interface enables the entities in the Controller | |||
Plane to communicate with devices in the Network Plane as illustrated | Plane to communicate with devices in the Network Plane as illustrated | |||
in <xref target="NorthSouth"/>. This interface leverages and ext ends | in <xref target="NorthSouth" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 7"/>. This interface leverages and extends | |||
TEAS to describe the physical topology and resources in the Netw ork | TEAS to describe the physical topology and resources in the Netw ork | |||
Plane. | Plane. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<figure align="center" anchor="NorthSouth" | <figure anchor="NorthSouth" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="fi | |||
title="Northbound and Southbound interfaces"> | gure-7"> | |||
<artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ | <name slugifiedName="name-northbound-and-southbound-i">Northbound an | |||
d Southbound Interfaces</name> | ||||
<artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-4.4.3-4.1"> | ||||
End End | End End | |||
System System | System System | |||
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Northbound -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- | -+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Northbound -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- | |||
CPF CPF CPF CPF | CPF CPF CPF CPF | |||
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Southbound -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- | -+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Southbound -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- | |||
DetNet DetNet DetNet DetNet | DetNet DetNet DetNet DetNet | |||
Node Node Node Node | Node Node Node Node | |||
NIC NIC | NIC NIC | |||
DetNet DetNet DetNet DetNet | DetNet DetNet DetNet DetNet | |||
Node Node Node Node | Node Node Node Node | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-4.4.3-5"> | |||
The DetNet nodes (and possibly the end systems NIC) expos | The DetNet nodes (and possibly the end systems' NICs) expose their capabilities | |||
e their capabilities and physical | and physical resources to the controller (the CPF) and update the CPFs with | |||
resources to the controller (the CPF), and update the CPF | their dynamic perception of the topology across the Southbound Interface. In | |||
s with their dynamic perception of the | return, the CPFs set the per-flow paths up, providing a Flow Characterization | |||
topology, across the Southbound Interface. In return, the | that is more tightly coupled to the DetNet node operation than a TSpec. | |||
CPFs set the per-flow | </t> | |||
paths up, providing a Flow Characterization that is more | <t pn="section-4.4.3-6"> At the Network Plane, DetNet nodes may exchan | |||
tightly coupled to the DetNet node | ge information regarding | |||
Operation than a TSpec. | the state of the paths, between adjacent DetNet nodes and possibly with the | |||
</t><t> | end systems, and forward packets within constraints associated to each flow, | |||
At the Network plane, DetNet nodes may exchange informati | or, when unable to do so, perform a last-resort operation such as drop or | |||
on regarding the state of the paths, | declassify. </t> | |||
between adjacent DetNet nodes and possibly with the end s | <t pn="section-4.4.3-7"> This document focuses on the Southbound inter | |||
ystems, and forward packets within | face and the | |||
constraints associated to each flow, or, when unable to d | operation of the Network Plane. | |||
o so, perform a last resort | </t> | |||
operation such as drop or declassify. | </section> | |||
</t><t> | ||||
This document focuses on the Southbound interface and the | ||||
operation of the Network Plane. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | <section anchor="QueuingModels" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC= | |||
<section anchor="QueuingModels" title="Queuing, Shaping, Scheduling, an | "false" pn="section-4.5"> | |||
d Preemption"> | <name slugifiedName="name-queuing-shaping-scheduling-">Queuing, Shaping, | |||
<t> | Scheduling, and Preemption</name> | |||
DetNet achieves bounded delivery latency | <t pn="section-4.5-1"> DetNet achieves bounded delivery latency by reser | |||
by reserving bandwidth and buffer resources at each DetNet node | ving bandwidth and buffer | |||
along | resources at each DetNet node along the path of the DetNet flow. The | |||
the path of the DetNet flow. | reservation itself is not sufficient, however. Implementors and users of a | |||
The reservation itself is not sufficient, however. Implementor | number of proprietary and standard real-time networks have found that | |||
s and users of a | standards for specific data-plane techniques are required to enable these | |||
number of | assurances to be made in a multivendor network. The fundamental reason is | |||
proprietary and standard real-time networks have found that sta | that latency variation in one DetNet system results in the need for extra | |||
ndards for | buffer space in the next-hop DetNet system(s), which in turn increases the | |||
specific data plane techniques are required to enable these ass | worst-case per-hop latency. </t> | |||
urances to be | <t pn="section-4.5-2"> Standard queuing and transmission-selection algor | |||
made in a multi-vendor | ithms allow TE | |||
network. The fundamental reason is that latency variation in o | (<xref target="te" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4 | |||
ne DetNet system results | .4"/>) to compute the latency contribution of each | |||
in the need for extra buffer space in the next-hop DetNet syste | DetNet node to the end-to-end latency, to compute the amount of buffer space | |||
m(s), which in turn, | required in each DetNet node for each incremental DetNet flow, and most | |||
increases the worst-case per-hop latency. | importantly, to translate from a flow specification to a set of values for the | |||
</t><t> | managed objects that control each relay or end system. For example, the IEEE | |||
Standard queuing and transmission selection algorithms allow tr | 802.1 WG has specified (and is specifying) a set of queuing, shaping, and | |||
affic engineering | scheduling algorithms that enable each DetNet node, and/or a central | |||
<xref target="te"/> to compute the latency contribution | controller, to compute these values. These algorithms include: | |||
of each DetNet node to the end-to-end latency, to compute the a | </t> | |||
mount of buffer space | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.5-3"> | |||
required in each DetNet node for each incremental DetNet flow, | <li pn="section-4.5-3.1"> | |||
and most importantly, to | A credit-based shaper <xref target="IEEE802.1Qav" format="default" sectionForm | |||
translate from a flow specification to a set of values for the | at="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.1Qav"/> (incorporated to <xref target="IEEE802.1 | |||
managed objects that | Q" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.1Q"/>). </li> | |||
control each relay or end system. For example, the IEEE 802.1 | <li pn="section-4.5-3.2"> Time-gated queues governed by a rotating tim | |||
WG has specified (and is | e schedule based on | |||
specifying) a set of queuing, shaping, and scheduling algorithm | synchronized time <xref target="IEEE802.1Qbv" format="default" sectionFormat="of | |||
s | " derivedContent="IEEE802.1Qbv"/> (incorporated to <xref target="IEEE802.1Q" for | |||
that enable each DetNet node, and/or a central controller, to | mat="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.1Q"/>). | |||
compute these values. These algorithms include: | </li> | |||
<list style="symbols"> | <li pn="section-4.5-3.3"> Synchronized double (or triple) buffers driv | |||
<t> | en by synchronized time ticks. | |||
A credit-based shaper <xref target="IEEE802.1Qav"/> (su | <xref target="IEEE802.1Qch" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent=" | |||
perseded by <xref target="IEEE802.1Q-2018"/>). | IEEE802.1Qch"/> (incorporated to <xref target="IEEE802.1Q" format="default" sect | |||
</t><t> | ionFormat="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.1Q"/>). </li> | |||
Time-gated queues governed by a rotating time schedule | <li pn="section-4.5-3.4"> Preemption of an Ethernet packet in transmis | |||
based on synchronized time | sion by a packet with a more | |||
<xref target="IEEE802.1Qbv"/> (superseded by <xref targ | stringent latency requirement, followed by the resumption of the preempted | |||
et="IEEE802.1Q-2018"/>). | packet <xref target="IEEE802.1Qbu" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedCo | |||
</t><t> | ntent="IEEE802.1Qbu"/> (incorporated to <xref target="IEEE802.1Q" format="defaul | |||
Synchronized double (or triple) buffers driven by synch | t" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.1Q"/>) <xref target="IEEE802.3br" | |||
ronized time ticks. | format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.3br"/> (incorporated | |||
<xref target="IEEE802.1Qch"/> (superseded by <xref targ | to <xref target="IEEE802.3" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent= | |||
et="IEEE802.1Q-2018"/>). | "IEEE802.3"/>). | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
Pre-emption of an Ethernet packet in transmission by a | </ul> | |||
packet with a more stringent | <t pn="section-4.5-4"> While these techniques are currently embedded in | |||
latency requirement, followed by the resumption of the | Ethernet <xref target="IEEE802.3" format="default" sectionFormat= | |||
preempted packet | "of" derivedContent="IEEE802.3"/> and bridging | |||
<xref target="IEEE802.1Qbu"/> (superseded by <xref targ | standards, we can note that they are all, except perhaps for | |||
et="IEEE802.1Q-2018"/>), | packet preemption, equally applicable to media other than | |||
<xref target="IEEE802.3br"/> (superseded by <xref targe | Ethernet and to routers as well as bridges. Other media may | |||
t="IEEE802.3-2018"/>). | have their own methods (see, e.g., <xref target="I-D.ietf-6tisch- | |||
</t> | architecture" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="TSCH-ARCH"/> a | |||
</list> | nd <xref target="RFC7554" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RF | |||
</t><t> | C7554"/>). | |||
While these techniques are currently embedded in Ethernet <xre | Further techniques are defined by the IETF (e.g., <xref target="R | |||
f target="IEEE802.3-2018"/> and bridging standards, | FC8289" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8289"/> and <xref | |||
we can note that they are all, except perhaps for packet preemp | target="RFC8033" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8033"/> | |||
tion, equally applicable | ). DetNet may | |||
to other media than Ethernet, and to routers as well as bridges | include such definitions in the future or may define how | |||
. Other media may have its | these techniques can be used by DetNet nodes. | |||
own methods, see, e.g., <xref target="I-D.ietf-6tisch-architect | </t> | |||
ure"/>, <xref target="RFC7554"/>. | </section> | |||
Further techniques are defined by the IETF, e.g., <xref target= | <section anchor="ServInst" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="fals | |||
"RFC8289"/> and <xref target="RFC8033"/>. | e" pn="section-4.6"> | |||
DetNet may include such | <name slugifiedName="name-service-instance">Service Instance</name> | |||
definitions in the future, or may define how these techniques c | <t pn="section-4.6-1"> A service instance represents all the functions r | |||
an be used by DetNet nodes. | equired | |||
</t> | on a DetNet node to allow the end-to-end service between the | |||
</section> | UNIs. | |||
</t> | ||||
<section anchor="ServInst" title="Service instance"> | <t pn="section-4.6-2"> The DetNet network general reference model is sho | |||
<t> A Service instance represents all the functions required on a | wn in <xref target="fig_DetNetrefmodel" format="default" sectionFormat="of" deri | |||
DetNet node to allow the end-to-end service between the UNIs. | vedContent="Figure 8"/> for a DetNet service scenario (i.e., between two | |||
</t> | DetNet-UNIs). In this figure, end systems ("A" and "B") are connected directly | |||
to the edge nodes of an IP/MPLS network ("PE1" and "PE2"). End systems | ||||
<t> The DetNet network general reference model is shown in <xref | participating in DetNet communication may require connectivity before setting | |||
target="fig_DetNetrefmodel"/> for a DetNet service scenario (i.e., between two D | up an App-flow that requires the DetNet service. Such a connectivity-related | |||
etNet-UNIs). In this figure, end systems ("A" and "B") are connected directly to | service instance and the one dedicated for DetNet service share the same | |||
the edge nodes of an IP/MPLS network ("PE1" and "PE2"). End systems participati | access. Packets belonging to a DetNet flow are selected by a filter configured | |||
ng in DetNet communication may require connectivity before setting up an App-flo | on the access ("F1" and "F2"). As a result, data-flow-specific access | |||
w that requires the DetNet service. Such a connectivity related service instance | ("access-A + F1" and "access-B + F2") is terminated in the flow-specific | |||
and the one dedicated for DetNet service share the same access. Packets belongi | service instance ("SI-1" and "SI-2"). A tunnel is used to provide connectivity | |||
ng to a DetNet flow are selected by a filter configured on the access ("F1" and | between the service instances. | |||
"F2"). As a result, data flow specific access ("access-A + F1" and "access-B + F | </t> | |||
2") are terminated in the flow specific service instance ("SI-1" and "SI-2"). A | <t pn="section-4.6-3"> The tunnel is exclusively used for the packets of | |||
tunnel is used to provide connectivity between the service instances. | the DetNet flow between "SI-1" and "SI-2". The service instances are configured | |||
</t> | to implement DetNet functions and a flow-specific DetNet forwarding. The servic | |||
e instance and the tunnel may or may not be shared by multiple DetNet flows. Sha | ||||
<t> The tunnel is exclusively used for the packets of the DetNet | ring the service instance by multiple DetNet flows requires properly populated f | |||
flow between "SI-1" and "SI-2". The service instances are configured to implemen | orwarding tables of the service instance. | |||
t DetNet functions and a flow specific DetNet forwarding. The service instance a | </t> | |||
nd the tunnel may or may not be shared by multiple DetNet flows. Sharing the ser | <figure anchor="fig_DetNetrefmodel" align="left" suppress-title="false" | |||
vice instance by multiple DetNet flows requires properly populated forwarding ta | pn="figure-8"> | |||
bles of the service instance. | <name slugifiedName="name-detnet-network-general-refe">DetNet Network | |||
</t> | General Reference Model</name> | |||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.6-4.1"> | ||||
<figure anchor="fig_DetNetrefmodel" align="center" | ||||
title="DetNet network general reference model"> | ||||
<artwork><![CDATA[ | ||||
access-A access-B | access-A access-B | |||
<-----> <-------- tunnel ----------> <-----> | <-----> <-------- tunnel ----------> <-----> | |||
+---------+ ___ _ +---------+ | +---------+ ___ _ +---------+ | |||
End system | +----+ | / \/ \_ | +----+ | End system | End system | +----+ | / \/ \_ | +----+ | End system | |||
"A" -------F1+ | | / \ | | +F2----- "B" | "A" -------F1+ | | / \ | | +F2----- "B" | |||
| | +========+ IP/MPLS +=======+ | | | | | +========+ IP/MPLS +=======+ | | | |||
| |SI-1| | \__ Net._/ | |SI-2| | | | |SI-1| | \__ Net._/ | |SI-2| | | |||
| +----+ | \____/ | +----+ | | | +----+ | \____/ | +----+ | | |||
|PE1 | | PE2| | |PE1 | | PE2| | |||
+---------+ +---------+ | +---------+ +---------+</artwork> | |||
</figure> | ||||
]]></artwork> | <t pn="section-4.6-5"> The tunnel between the service instances may have | |||
</figure> | some special | |||
characteristics. For example, in case of a DetNet L3 service, there are | ||||
<t> The tunnel between the service instances may have some specia | differences in the usage of the PW for DetNet traffic compared to the network | |||
l characteristics. For example, in case of a DetNet L3 service, there are differ | model described in <xref target="RFC6658" format="default" sectionFormat="of" de | |||
ences in the usage of the PW for DetNet traffic compared to the network model de | rivedContent="RFC6658"/>. In the DetNet scenario, the PW is | |||
scribed in <xref target="RFC6658"/>. In the DetNet scenario, the PW is likely to | likely to be used exclusively by the DetNet flow, whereas <xref target="RFC6658" | |||
be used exclusively by the DetNet flow, whereas <xref target="RFC6658"/> states | format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6658"/> states: | |||
: "The packet PW appears as a single point-to-point link to the client layer. N | </t> | |||
etwork-layer adjacency formation and maintenance between the client equipment wi | <blockquote pn="section-4.6-6"> | |||
ll follow the normal practice needed to support the required relationship in the | The packet PW appears as a single point-to-point link to the client | |||
client layer ... This packet PseudoWire is used to transport all of the require | layer. Network-layer adjacency formation and maintenance between the | |||
d Layer-2 and Layer-3 protocols between LSR1 and LSR2". Further details are netw | client equipments will follow the normal practice needed to support | |||
ork technology specific and can be found in <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol | the required relationship in the client layer. | |||
-mpls"/> and <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol-ip"/>. | </blockquote> | |||
</t> | <t pn="section-4.6-7">and</t> | |||
<blockquote pn="section-4.6-8"> | ||||
</section> | This packet pseudowire is used to transport all of the required layer 2 and | |||
<section anchor="FlowIDatTechBord" title="Flow identification at techno | layer 3 protocols between LSR1 and LSR2. | |||
logy borders"> | </blockquote> | |||
<t>This section discusses what needs to be done at technology border | <t pn="section-4.6-9"> | |||
s including | Further details are network technology specific and can be found in <xref target | |||
Ethernet as one of the technologies. Flow identification for MPL | ="I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework" format="default" sectionFormat="of" deri | |||
S and IP data | vedContent="DETNET-FRAMEWORK"/>. | |||
planes are described in <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpl | </t> | |||
s"/> and | </section> | |||
<xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol-ip"/>, respectively. | <section anchor="FlowIDatTechBord" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInR | |||
</t> | FC="false" pn="section-4.7"> | |||
<name slugifiedName="name-flow-identification-at-tech">Flow Identificati | ||||
<section anchor="Relayering" title="Exporting flow identification"> | on at Technology Borders</name> | |||
<t> | <t pn="section-4.7-1">This section discusses what needs to be done at te | |||
A DetNet node may need to map specific flows to lower layer flo | chnology | |||
ws (or Streams) in order to provide specific | borders including Ethernet as one of the technologies. Flow | |||
queuing and shaping services for specific flows. For example: | identification for MPLS and IP Data Planes are described in <xref ta | |||
<list style="symbols"> | rget="I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent=" | |||
<t> | DETNET-MPLS"/> and <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-ip" format="default" sectionFor | |||
mat="of" derivedContent="DETNET-IP"/>, | ||||
respectively. | ||||
</t> | ||||
<section anchor="Relayering" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC=" | ||||
false" pn="section-4.7.1"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-exporting-flow-identificati">Exporting Flow | ||||
Identification</name> | ||||
<t pn="section-4.7.1-1"> | ||||
A DetNet node may need to map specific flows to lower-layer | ||||
flows (or Streams) in order to provide specific queuing and | ||||
shaping services for specific flows. For example: | ||||
</t> | ||||
<ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.7.1-2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-4.7.1-2.1"> | ||||
A non-IP, strictly L2 source end system X may be sending multiple flows | A non-IP, strictly L2 source end system X may be sending multiple flows | |||
to the same L2 destination end system Y. Those f lows may include | to the same L2 destination end system Y. Those f lows may include | |||
DetNet flows with different QoS requirements, and may include non-DetNet | DetNet flows with different QoS requirements and may include non-DetNet | |||
flows. | flows. | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.7.1-2.2"> | ||||
A router may be sending any number of flows to an other router. | A router may be sending any number of flows to an other router. | |||
Again, those flows may include | Again, those flows may include | |||
DetNet flows with different QoS requirements, and may include non-DetNet | DetNet flows with different QoS requirements and may include non-DetNet | |||
flows. | flows. | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.7.1-2.3"> | ||||
Two routers may be separated by bridges. For the se bridges to perform | Two routers may be separated by bridges. For the se bridges to perform | |||
any required per-flow queuing and shaping, they m ust be able to identify | any required per-flow queuing and shaping, they m ust be able to identify | |||
the individual flows. | the individual flows. | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.7.1-2.4"> | ||||
A Label Edge Router (LER) may have a Label Switch ed | A Label Edge Router (LER) may have a Label Switch ed | |||
Path (LSP) set up for handling traffic | Path (LSP) set up for handling traffic | |||
destined for a particular IP address carrying onl y non-DetNet flows. If | destined for a particular IP address carrying onl y non-DetNet flows. If | |||
a DetNet flow to that same address is requested, a separate LSP may be | a DetNet flow to that same address is requested, a separate LSP may be | |||
needed, in order that all of the Label Switch Rou | needed in order for all of the Label Switch Route | |||
ters (LSRs) along the | rs (LSRs) along the | |||
path to the destination give that flow special qu | path to the destination to give that flow special | |||
euing and shaping. | queuing and shaping. | |||
</t> | </li> | |||
</list> | </ul> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-4.7.1-3"> The need for a lower-layer node to be aware o | |||
The need for a lower-layer node to be aware of individual highe | f | |||
r-layer | individual higher-layer flows is not unique to DetNet. But, | |||
flows is not unique to DetNet. But, given the endless complexi | given the endless complexity of layering and relayering over | |||
ty of layering | tunnels that is available to network designers, DetNet needs | |||
and relayering over tunnels that is available to network design | to provide a model for flow identification that is better than | |||
ers, DetNet | packet inspection. That is not to say that packet inspection | |||
needs to provide a model for flow identification that is | to Layer 4 or Layer 5 addresses will not be used or the | |||
better than packet inspection. That is not to say that packet | capability standardized; however, there are alternatives. </t> | |||
inspection | <t pn="section-4.7.1-4"> | |||
to Layer-4 or Layer-5 addresses | A DetNet relay node can connect DetNet flows on different | |||
will not be used, or the capability standardized; but, there ar | paths using different flow identification methods. For | |||
e alternatives. | example: | |||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
A DetNet relay node can connect DetNet flows on different paths | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.7.1-5"> | |||
using different | <li pn="section-4.7.1-5.1"> | |||
flow identification methods. For example: | ||||
<list style="symbols"> | ||||
<t> | ||||
A single unicast DetNet flow passing from router A thro ugh a bridged network | A single unicast DetNet flow passing from router A thro ugh a bridged network | |||
to router B may be assigned a TSN Stream identifier tha t is | to router B may be assigned a TSN Stream identifier tha t is | |||
unique within that bridged network. The bridges can th en identify the | unique within that bridged network. The bridges can th en identify the | |||
flow without accessing higher-layer headers. Of course , the receiving router | flow without accessing higher-layer headers. Of course , the receiving router | |||
must recognize and accept that TSN Stream. | must recognize and accept that TSN Stream. | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.7.1-5.2"> | ||||
A DetNet flow passing from LSR A to LSR B may be assign ed a different | A DetNet flow passing from LSR A to LSR B may be assign ed a different | |||
label than that used for other flows to the same IP des tination. | label than that used for other flows to the same IP des tination. | |||
</t> | </li> | |||
</list> | </ul> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-4.7.1-6"> | |||
In any of the above cases, it is possible that an existing DetN et flow can | In any of the above cases, it is possible that an existing DetN et flow can | |||
be an aggregate carrying multiple other DetNet flows. (Not to | be an aggregate carrying multiple other DetNet flows (not to be | |||
be confused | confused | |||
with DetNet compound vs. member flows.) Of course, this requir | with DetNet compound vs. member flows). Of course, this requir | |||
es that the | es that the | |||
aggregate DetNet flow be provisioned properly to carry the aggr egated flows. | aggregate DetNet flow be provisioned properly to carry the aggr egated flows. | |||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
<t pn="section-4.7.1-7"> | ||||
Thus, rather than packet inspection, there is the option to exp ort | Thus, rather than packet inspection, there is the option to exp ort | |||
higher-layer information to the lower layer. The requirement t o support | higher-layer information to the lower layer. The requirement t o support | |||
one or the other method for flow identification (or both) is a | one or the other method for flow identification (or both) is a | |||
complexity that is part of DetNet control models. | complexity that is part of DetNet control models. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="FlowAttrMapping" numbered="true" toc="include" removeIn | ||||
<section anchor="FlowAttrMapping" title="Flow attribute mapping between | RFC="false" pn="section-4.7.2"> | |||
layers"> | <name slugifiedName="name-flow-attribute-mapping-betw">Flow Attribute | |||
<t>Forwarding of packets of DetNet flows over multiple technology | Mapping between Layers</name> | |||
domains may require that lower layers are aware of specific flows of higher lay | <t pn="section-4.7.2-1">Forwarding of packets of DetNet flows over mul | |||
ers. Such an "exporting of flow identification" is needed each time when the for | tiple | |||
warding paradigm is changed on the forwarding path (e.g., two LSRs are interconn | technology domains may require that lower layers are aware of | |||
ected by a L2 bridged domain, etc.). The three representative forwarding methods | specific flows of higher layers. Such an "exporting of flow | |||
considered for deterministic networking are: | identification" is needed each time when the forwarding | |||
<list style="symbols"> | paradigm is changed on the forwarding path (e.g., two LSRs are | |||
<t>IP routing</t> | interconnected by an L2 bridged domain, etc.). The three | |||
<t>MPLS label switching</t> | representative forwarding methods considered for DetNet | |||
<t>Ethernet bridging</t> | are: | |||
</list> | </t> | |||
A packet with corresponding Flow-IDs is illustrated in <xref targ | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.7.2-2"> | |||
et="fig_FlowIDStack"/>, | <li pn="section-4.7.2-2.1">IP routing</li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.7.2-2.2">MPLS label switching</li> | ||||
<li pn="section-4.7.2-2.3">Ethernet bridging</li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
<t pn="section-4.7.2-3"> | ||||
A packet with corresponding Flow-IDs is illustrated in <xref targ | ||||
et="fig_FlowIDStack" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure | ||||
9"/>, | ||||
which also indicates where each Flow-ID can be added or removed. | which also indicates where each Flow-ID can be added or removed. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
<figure anchor="fig_FlowIDStack" align="left" suppress-title="false" p | ||||
<figure anchor="fig_FlowIDStack" align="center" | n="figure-9"> | |||
title="Packet with multiple Flow-IDs"> | <name slugifiedName="name-packet-with-multiple-flow-i">Packet with M | |||
<artwork><![CDATA[ | ultiple Flow-IDs</name> | |||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.7.2-4.1"> | ||||
add/remove add/remove | add/remove add/remove | |||
Eth Flow-ID IP Flow-ID | Eth Flow-ID IP Flow-ID | |||
| | | | | | |||
v v | v v | |||
+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| Eth | MPLS | IP | Application data | | | Eth | MPLS | IP | Application data | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | |||
+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | |||
^ | ^ | |||
| | | | |||
add/remove | add/remove | |||
MPLS Flow-ID | MPLS Flow-ID | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t pn="section-4.7.2-5"> The additional (domain-specific) Flow-ID can | ||||
<t> The additional (domain specific) Flow-ID can be | be: | |||
<list style="symbols"> | </t> | |||
<t>created by a domain specific function or </t> | <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.7.2-6"> | |||
<t>derived from the Flow-ID added to the App-flow. </t> | <li pn="section-4.7.2-6.1">created by a domain-specific function or | |||
</list> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.7.2-6.2">derived from the Flow-ID added to the App | ||||
-flow. </li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
<t pn="section-4.7.2-7"> | ||||
The Flow-ID must be unique inside a given domain. Note that the F low-ID added to the App-flow is still present in the packet, but some nodes may lack the function to recognize it; that's why the additional Flow-ID is added. | The Flow-ID must be unique inside a given domain. Note that the F low-ID added to the App-flow is still present in the packet, but some nodes may lack the function to recognize it; that's why the additional Flow-ID is added. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="FlowIDMapEx" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC= | ||||
<section anchor="FlowIDMapEx" title="Flow-ID mapping examples"> | "false" pn="section-4.7.3"> | |||
<t> IP nodes and MPLS nodes are assumed to be configured to push | <name slugifiedName="name-flow-id-mapping-examples">Flow-ID Mapping Ex | |||
such an additional (domain specific) Flow-ID when sending traffic to an Ethernet | amples</name> | |||
switch (as shown in the examples below). | <t pn="section-4.7.3-1"> IP nodes and MPLS nodes are assumed to be con | |||
</t> | figured to push such an additional (domain-specific) Flow-ID when sending traffi | |||
c to an Ethernet switch (as shown in the examples below). | ||||
<t> <xref target="fig_ippushflowid"/> shows a scenario where an I | </t> | |||
P end system ("IP-A") is connected via two Ethernet switches ("ETH-n") to an IP | <t pn="section-4.7.3-2"><xref target="fig_ippushflowid" format="defaul | |||
router ("IP-1"). | t" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 10"/> shows a scenario where an IP | |||
</t> | end system ("IP-A") is connected via two Ethernet switches ("ETH-n") to an IP ro | |||
uter ("IP-1"). | ||||
<figure anchor="fig_ippushflowid" align="center" | </t> | |||
title="IP nodes interconnected by an Ethernet domain"> | <figure anchor="fig_ippushflowid" align="left" suppress-title="false" | |||
<artwork><![CDATA[ | pn="figure-10"> | |||
<name slugifiedName="name-ip-nodes-interconnected-by-">IP Nodes Inte | ||||
rconnected by an Ethernet Domain</name> | ||||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.7.3-3.1"> | ||||
IP domain | IP domain | |||
<----------------------------------------------- | <----------------------------------------------- | |||
+======+ +======+ | +======+ +======+ | |||
|L3-ID | |L3-ID | | |L3-ID | |L3-ID | | |||
+======+ /\ +-----+ +======+ | +======+ /\ +-----+ +======+ | |||
/ \ Forward as | | | / \ Forward as | | | |||
/IP-A\ per ETH-ID |IP-1 | Recognize | /IP-A\ per ETH-ID |IP-1 | Recognize | |||
Push ------> +-+----+ | +---+-+ <----- ETH-ID | Push ------> +-+----+ | +---+-+ <----- ETH-ID | |||
ETH-ID | +----+-----+ | | ETH-ID | +----+-----+ | | |||
| v v | | | v v | | |||
| +-----+ +-----+ | | | +-----+ +-----+ | | |||
+------+ | | +---------+ | +------+ | | +---------+ | |||
+......+ |ETH-1+----+ETH-2| +======+ | +......+ |ETH-1+----+ETH-2| +======+ | |||
.L3-ID . +-----+ +-----+ |L3-ID | | .L3-ID . +-----+ +-----+ |L3-ID | | |||
+======+ +......+ +======+ | +======+ +......+ +======+ | |||
|ETH-ID| .L3-ID . |ETH-ID| | |ETH-ID| .L3-ID . |ETH-ID| | |||
+======+ +======+ +------+ | +======+ +======+ +------+ | |||
|ETH-ID| | |ETH-ID| | |||
+======+ | +======+ | |||
Ethernet domain | Ethernet domain | |||
<----------------> | <----------------> | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t pn="section-4.7.3-4"> End system "IP-A" uses the original App-flow- | ||||
<t> End system "IP-A" uses the original App-flow specific ID ("L3 | specific ID | |||
-ID"), but as it is connected to an Ethernet domain it has to push an Ethernet-d | ("L3-ID"), but as it is connected to an Ethernet | |||
omain specific flow-ID ("ETH-ID") before sending the packet to "ETH-1" node. Eth | domain, it has to push an Ethernet-domain-specific | |||
ernet switch "ETH-1" can recognize the data flow based on the "ETH-ID" and it do | Flow-ID ("ETH-ID") before sending the packet to | |||
es forwarding toward "ETH-2". "ETH-2" switches the packet toward the IP router. | "ETH-1". Ethernet switch "ETH-1" can recognize the data flow | |||
"IP-1" must be configured to receive the Ethernet Flow-ID specific multicast flo | based on the "ETH-ID", and it does forwarding toward | |||
w, but (as it is an L3 node) it decodes the data flow ID based on the "L3-ID" fi | "ETH-2". "ETH-2" switches the packet toward the IP | |||
elds of the received packet. | router. "IP-1" must be configured to receive the Ethernet | |||
</t> | Flow-ID-specific multicast | |||
flow, but (as it is an L3 | ||||
<t> <xref target="fig_mplspushflowid"/> shows a scenario where MP | node) it decodes the data flow ID based on the "L3-ID" fields | |||
LS domain nodes ("PE-n" and "P-m") are connected via two Ethernet switches ("ETH | of the received packet. | |||
-n"). | </t> | |||
</t> | <t pn="section-4.7.3-5"><xref target="fig_mplspushflowid" format="defa | |||
ult" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 11"/> shows a scenario where MPLS | ||||
<figure anchor="fig_mplspushflowid" align="center" | domain nodes ("PE-n" and "P-m") are connected via two Ethernet switches ("ETH-n | |||
title="MPLS nodes interconnected by an Ethernet domain"> | "). | |||
<artwork><![CDATA[ | </t> | |||
<figure anchor="fig_mplspushflowid" align="left" suppress-title="false | ||||
" pn="figure-11"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-mpls-nodes-interconnected-b">MPLS Nodes In | ||||
terconnected by an Ethernet Domain</name> | ||||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.7.3-6.1"> | ||||
MPLS domain | MPLS domain | |||
<-----------------------------------------------> | <-----------------------------------------------> | |||
+=======+ +=======+ | +=======+ +=======+ | |||
|MPLS-ID| |MPLS-ID| | |MPLS-ID| |MPLS-ID| | |||
+=======+ +-----+ +-----+ +=======+ +-----+ | +=======+ +-----+ +-----+ +=======+ +-----+ | |||
| | Forward as | | | | | | | Forward as | | | | | |||
|PE-1 | per ETH-ID | P-2 +-----------+ PE-2| | |PE-1 | per ETH-ID | P-2 +-----------+ PE-2| | |||
Push -----> +-+---+ | +---+-+ +-----+ | Push -----> +-+---+ | +---+-+ +-----+ | |||
ETH-ID | +-----+----+ | \ Recognize | ETH-ID | +-----+----+ | \ Recognize | |||
| v v | +-- ETH-ID | | v v | +-- ETH-ID | |||
| +-----+ +-----+ | | | +-----+ +-----+ | | |||
+---+ | | +----+ | +---+ | | +----+ | |||
+.......+ |ETH-1+----+ETH-2| +=======+ | +.......+ |ETH-1+----+ETH-2| +=======+ | |||
.MPLS-ID. +-----+ +-----+ |MPLS-ID| | .MPLS-ID. +-----+ +-----+ |MPLS-ID| | |||
+=======+ +=======+ | +=======+ +=======+ | |||
|ETH-ID | +.......+ |ETH-ID | | |ETH-ID | +.......+ |ETH-ID | | |||
+=======+ .MPLS-ID. +-------+ | +=======+ .MPLS-ID. +-------+ | |||
+=======+ | +=======+ | |||
|ETH-ID | | |ETH-ID | | |||
+=======+ | +=======+ | |||
Ethernet domain | Ethernet domain | |||
<----------------> | <----------------> | |||
]]></artwork> | </artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t pn="section-4.7.3-7"> "PE-1" uses the MPLS-specific ID ("MPLS-ID"), | ||||
<t> "PE-1" uses the MPLS specific ID ("MPLS-ID"), but as it is co | but as it | |||
nnected to an Ethernet domain it has to push an Ethernet-domain specific flow-ID | is connected to an Ethernet domain, it has to push an | |||
("ETH-ID") before sending the packet to "ETH-1". Ethernet switch "ETH-1" can re | Ethernet-domain-specific Flow-ID | |||
cognize the data flow based on the "ETH-ID" and it does forwarding toward "ETH-2 | ("ETH-ID") before sending the | |||
". "ETH-2" switches the packet toward the MPLS node ("P-2"). "P-2" must be confi | packet to "ETH-1". Ethernet switch "ETH-1" can recognize the | |||
gured to receive the Ethernet Flow-ID specific multicast flow, but (as it is an | data flow based on the "ETH-ID", and it does forwarding toward | |||
MPLS node) it decodes the data flow ID based on the "MPLS-ID" fields of the rece | "ETH-2". "ETH-2" switches the packet toward the MPLS node | |||
ived packet. | ("P-2"). "P-2" must be configured to receive the Ethernet | |||
</t> | Flow-ID-specific multicast flow, but (as it is an MPLS node) | |||
<t>One can appreciate from the above example that, when the means used f | it decodes the data flow ID based on the "MPLS-ID" fields of | |||
or DetNet flow identification | the received packet. | |||
</t> | ||||
<t pn="section-4.7.3-8">One can appreciate from the above example that | ||||
, when the means used for DetNet flow identification | ||||
is altered or exported, the means for encoding the sequence number i nformation must similarly | is altered or exported, the means for encoding the sequence number i nformation must similarly | |||
be altered or exported. | be altered or exported. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | <section anchor="Advertising" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="f | |||
<section anchor="Advertising" title="Advertising resources, capabilitie | alse" pn="section-4.8"> | |||
s and adjacencies"> | <name slugifiedName="name-advertising-resources-capab">Advertising Resou | |||
<t> | rces, Capabilities, and Adjacencies</name> | |||
<t pn="section-4.8-1"> | ||||
Provisioning of DetNet requires knowledge about: | Provisioning of DetNet requires knowledge about: | |||
<list style="symbols"><t> | </t> | |||
<ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.8-2"> | ||||
<li pn="section-4.8-2.1"> | ||||
Details of the DetNet system's capabilities that are requ ired in order to | Details of the DetNet system's capabilities that are requ ired in order to | |||
accurately allocate that DetNet system's resources, as we ll as other DetNet systems' | accurately allocate that DetNet system's resources, as we ll as other DetNet systems' | |||
resources. This includes, for example, which specific qu euing and | resources. This includes, for example, which specific qu euing and | |||
shaping algorithms are implemented (<xref target="Queuing Models"/>), | shaping algorithms are implemented (<xref target="Queuing Models" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.5"/>), | |||
the number of buffers dedicated for DetNet allocation, an d the worst-case | the number of buffers dedicated for DetNet allocation, an d the worst-case | |||
forwarding delay and misordering. | forwarding delay and misordering. | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
<li pn="section-4.8-2.2"> | ||||
The actual state of a DetNet node's DetNet resources. | The actual state of a DetNet node's DetNet resources. | |||
</t><t> | </li> | |||
The identity of the DetNet system's neighbors, and the ch | <li pn="section-4.8-2.3"> | |||
aracteristics of the | The identity of the DetNet system's neighbors and the cha | |||
racteristics of the | ||||
link(s) between the DetNet systems, including the latency of | link(s) between the DetNet systems, including the latency of | |||
the links (in nanoseconds). | the links (in nanoseconds). | |||
</t> | </li> | |||
</list> | </ul> | |||
</t> | </section> | |||
</section> | <section anchor="Scaling" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false | |||
" pn="section-4.9"> | ||||
<section anchor="Scaling" title="Scaling to larger networks"> | <name slugifiedName="name-scaling-to-larger-networks">Scaling to Larger | |||
<t> | Networks</name> | |||
<t pn="section-4.9-1"> | ||||
Reservations for individual DetNet flows require considerable s tate information in | Reservations for individual DetNet flows require considerable s tate information in | |||
each DetNet node, especially when adequate fault mitigation | each DetNet node, especially when adequate fault mitigation | |||
(<xref target="FaultMitigation"/>) is required. The DetNet dat a plane, in order to | (<xref target="FaultMitigation" format="default" sectionFormat= "of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.2"/>) is required. The DetNet Data Plane, in o rder to | |||
support larger numbers of DetNet flows, must support the aggreg ation of DetNet flows. | support larger numbers of DetNet flows, must support the aggreg ation of DetNet flows. | |||
Such aggregated flows can be viewed by the DetNet nodes' data p lane | Such aggregated flows can be viewed by the DetNet nodes' Data P lane | |||
largely as individual DetNet flows. Without such aggregation, the per-relay | largely as individual DetNet flows. Without such aggregation, the per-relay | |||
system may limit the scale of DetNet networks. Example techniqu es that may be used | system may limit the scale of DetNet networks. Example techniqu es that may be used | |||
include MPLS hierarchy and IP DiffServ Code Points (DSCPs). | include MPLS hierarchy and IP DiffServ Code Points (DSCPs). | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="Compatibility" title="Compatibility with Layer-2"> | <section anchor="Compatibility" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC= | |||
<t> | "false" pn="section-4.10"> | |||
Standards providing similar | <name slugifiedName="name-compatibility-with-layer-2">Compatibility with | |||
capabilities for bridged networks (only) have been and are bein | Layer 2</name> | |||
g generated in the | <t pn="section-4.10-1"> | |||
IEEE 802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee. The present architecture | Standards providing similar capabilities for bridged networks (only) have | |||
describes an abstract model that can be applicable both at Laye | been and are being generated in the IEEE 802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee. | |||
r-2 | The present architecture describes an abstract model that can be applicable | |||
and Layer-3, and over links not defined by IEEE 802. | both at Layer 2 and Layer 3, and over links not defined by IEEE 802. </t> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-4.10-2"> DetNet-enabled end systems and DetNet nodes can | |||
DetNet enabled end systems and DetNet nodes can be interc | be interconnected by | |||
onnected by | sub-networks, i.e., Layer 2 technologies. These sub-networks will provide | |||
sub-networks, i.e., Layer-2 technologies. | DetNet compatible service for support of DetNet traffic. Examples of | |||
These sub-networks will | sub-network technologies include MPLS TE, TSN as defined by IEEE 802.1, and a po | |||
provide DetNet compatible service for support of DetNet t | int-to-point OTN | |||
raffic. | link. Of course, multilayer DetNet systems may be possible too, where one | |||
Examples of sub-network technologies include MPLS TE, 802 | DetNet appears as a sub-network and provides service to a higher-layer DetNet | |||
.1 TSN, and a point-to-point OTN link. | system. | |||
Of course, multi-layer DetNet systems may be possible too | </t> | |||
, where one | </section> | |||
DetNet appears as a sub-network, and provides service to, | ||||
a higher layer | ||||
DetNet system. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="SecurityConsiderations" numbered="true" toc="include" remov | ||||
<section anchor="SecurityConsiderations" title="Security Considerations"> | eInRFC="false" pn="section-5"> | |||
<name slugifiedName="name-security-considerations">Security Considerations | ||||
<t> | </name> | |||
Security considerations for DetNet are described in detail in | <t pn="section-5-1"> | |||
<xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-security"/>. This section conside | Security considerations for DetNet are described in detail | |||
rs | in <xref target="I-D.ietf-detnet-security" format="default" sec | |||
exclusively security considerations which are specific to the D | tionFormat="of" derivedContent="DETNET-SECURITY"/>. This section considers | |||
etNet | exclusively security considerations that are specific to the | |||
architecture. | DetNet architecture. </t> | |||
</t><t> | <t pn="section-5-2"> Security aspects that are | |||
Security aspects which are unique to DetNet are those whose aim | unique to DetNet are those whose aim is to provide the | |||
is to | specific QoS aspects of DetNet, which are | |||
provide the specific quality of service aspects of DetNet, whic | primarily to deliver data flows with extremely low packet | |||
h are | loss rates and bounded end-to-end delivery latency. A DetNet | |||
primarily to deliver data flows with extremely low packet loss | may be implemented using MPLS and/or IP (including both v4 | |||
rates | and v6) technologies and thus inherits the security | |||
and bounded end-to-end delivery latency. A DetNet may be implem | properties of those technologies at both the Data Plane and | |||
ented | the Controller Plane. </t> | |||
using MPLS and/or IP (including both v4 and v6) technologies, a | <t pn="section-5-3"> Security considerations for | |||
nd | DetNet are constrained (compared to, for example, the open | |||
thus inherits the security properties of those technologies at | Internet) because DetNet is defined to operate only within a | |||
both | single administrative domain (see <xref target="introduction" f | |||
the data plane and the control plane. | ormat="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 1"/>). The primary | |||
</t><t> | considerations are to secure the request and control of | |||
Security considerations for DetNet are constrained (compared to | DetNet resources, maintain confidentiality of data | |||
, for | traversing the DetNet, and provide the availability of the | |||
example, the open Internet) because DetNet is defined to operat | DetNet QoS. </t> | |||
e only | <t pn="section-5-4"> To secure the request | |||
within a single administrative domain (see Section 1). The prim | and control of DetNet resources, authentication and | |||
ary | authorization can be used for each device connected to a | |||
considerations are to secure the request and control of DetNet | DetNet domain, most importantly to network controller | |||
resources, maintain confidentiality of data traversing the DetN | devices. Control of a DetNet network may be centralized or | |||
et, | distributed (within a single administrative domain). In the | |||
and provide the availability of the DetNet quality of service. | case of centralized control, precedent for security | |||
</t><t> | considerations as defined for Abstraction and Control of | |||
To secure the request and control of DetNet resources, authenti | Traffic Engineered Networks (ACTN) can be found in <xref target | |||
cation | ="RFC8453" sectionFormat="of" section="9" format="default" derivedLink="https:// | |||
and authorization can be used for each device connected to a | rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8453#section-9" derivedContent="RFC8453"/>. In the case of | |||
DetNet domain, most importantly to network controller devices. | distributed | |||
Control | control protocols, DetNet security is expected to be | |||
of a DetNet network may be centralized or distributed (within a | provided by the security properties of the protocols in | |||
single | use. In any case, the result is that manipulation of | |||
administrative domain). In the case of centralized control, pre | administratively configurable parameters is limited to | |||
cedent | authorized entities. </t> | |||
for security considerations as defined for Abstraction and Cont | <t pn="section-5-5"> To maintain confidentiality of | |||
rol of | data traversing the DetNet, application flows can be | |||
Traffic Engineered Networks (ACTN) can be found in | protected through whatever means is provided by the | |||
<xref target="RFC8453"/>, Section 9. In the case of distributed | underlying technology. For example, encryption may be used, | |||
control protocols, DetNet security is expected to be provided b | such as that provided by IPsec <xref target="RFC4301" format="d | |||
y the | efault" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4301"/>, for | |||
security properties of the protocols in use. In any case, the r | IP flows and by MACSec <xref target="IEEE802.1AE" format="defau | |||
esult | lt" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="IEEE802.1AE"/> for | |||
is that manipulation of administratively configurable parameter | Ethernet (Layer 2) flows. </t> | |||
s is | <t pn="section-5-6"> DetNet flows are | |||
limited to authorized entities. | identified on a per-flow basis, which may provide attackers | |||
</t><t> | with additional information about the data flows (when | |||
To maintain confidentiality of data traversing the DetNet, | compared to networks that do not include per-flow | |||
application flows can be protected through whatever means is | identification). This is an inherent property of DetNet | |||
provided by the underlying technology. For example, encryption | that has security implications that should be considered | |||
may be | when determining if DetNet is a suitable technology for any | |||
used, such as that provided by IPSec <xref target="RFC4301"/> f | given use case. </t> | |||
or IP | <t pn="section-5-7"> To provide uninterrupted | |||
flows and by MACSec <xref target="IEEE802.1AE-2018"/> for Ether | availability of the DetNet QoS, provisions | |||
net | can be made against DoS attacks and delay attacks. To | |||
(Layer-2) flows. | protect against DoS attacks, excess traffic due to malicious | |||
</t><t> | or malfunctioning devices can be prevented or mitigated, for | |||
DetNet flows are identified on a per-flow basis, which may provide | example, through the use of traffic admission control | |||
attackers with additional information about the data flows (when | applied at the input of a DetNet domain as described in | |||
compared to networks that do not include per-flow identification). | <xref target="Zero" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derived | |||
This is an inherent property of DetNet which has security | Content="Section 3.2.1"/> and through the fault-mitigation | |||
implications that should be considered when determining if DetNet is | methods described in <xref target="FaultMitigation" format="def | |||
a suitable technology for any given use case. | ault" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.2"/>. To | |||
</t><t> | prevent DetNet packets from being delayed by an entity | |||
To provide uninterrupted availability of the DetNet quality of | external to a DetNet domain, DetNet technology definition | |||
service, provisions can be made against DOS attacks and delay | can allow for the mitigation of man-in-the-middle attacks, | |||
attacks. To protect against DOS attacks, excess traffic due to | for example, through use of authentication and authorization | |||
malicious or malfunctioning devices can be prevented or mitigat | of devices within the DetNet domain. </t> | |||
ed, | <t pn="section-5-8"> Because DetNet | |||
for example through the use of traffic admission control applie | mechanisms or applications that rely on DetNet can make | |||
d at | heavy use of methods that require precise time | |||
the input of a DetNet domain, as described in <xref target="Zer | synchronization, the accuracy, availability, and integrity | |||
o"/>, | of time synchronization is of critical importance. Extensive | |||
and through the fault mitigation methods described in | discussion of this topic can be found in <xref target="RFC7384" | |||
<xref target="FaultMitigation"/>. To prevent DetNet packets fro | format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7384"/>. </t> | |||
m | <t pn="section-5-9"> DetNet use cases are known to | |||
being delayed by an entity external to a DetNet domain, DetNet | have widely divergent security requirements. The intent of | |||
technology definition can allow for the mitigation of | this section is to provide a baseline for security | |||
Man-In-The-Middle attacks, for example through use of | considerations that are common to all DetNet designs and | |||
authentication and authorization of devices within the DetNet d | implementations, without burdening individual designs with | |||
omain. | specifics of security infrastructure that may not be | |||
</t><t> | germane to the given use case. Designers and implementors of | |||
Because DetNet mechanisms or applications that rely on DetNet can | DetNet systems are expected to take use-case-specific considera | |||
make heavy use of methods that require precise time synchroniza | tions | |||
tion, | into account in their DetNet designs | |||
the accuracy, availability, and integrity of time synchronizati | and implementations. | |||
on is | </t> | |||
of critical importance. Extensive discussion of this topic can | </section> | |||
be | <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-6"> | |||
found in <xref target="RFC7384"/>. | <name slugifiedName="name-privacy-considerations">Privacy Considerations</ | |||
</t><t> | name> | |||
DetNet use cases are known to have widely divergent security | <t pn="section-6-1"> | |||
requirements. The intent of this section is to provide a baseli | DetNet provides a QoS, and the generic | |||
ne for | ||||
security considerations which are common to all DetNet designs | ||||
and | ||||
implementations, without burdening individual designs with spec | ||||
ifics | ||||
of security infrastructure which may not be germane to the give | ||||
n use | ||||
case. Designers and implementers of DetNet systems are expected | ||||
to | ||||
take use case specific considerations into account in their Det | ||||
Net | ||||
designs and implementations. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section title="Privacy Considerations"> | ||||
<t> | ||||
DetNet provides a Quality of Service (QoS), and the generic | ||||
considerations for such mechanisms apply. In particular, such mar kings | considerations for such mechanisms apply. In particular, such mar kings | |||
allow for an attacker to correlate flows or to select particular types | allow for an attacker to correlate flows or to select particular types | |||
of flow for more detailed inspection. | of flow for more detailed inspection. | |||
</t><t> | </t> | |||
<t pn="section-6-2"> | ||||
However, the requirement for every (or almost every) node along t he path of | However, the requirement for every (or almost every) node along t he path of | |||
a DetNet flow to identify DetNet flows may present an additional attack | a DetNet flow to identify DetNet flows may present an additional attack | |||
surface for privacy, should the DetNet paradigm be found useful i n broader | surface for privacy should the DetNet paradigm be found useful in broader | |||
environments. | environments. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-7"> | ||||
<section title="IANA Considerations"> | <name slugifiedName="name-iana-considerations">IANA Considerations</name> | |||
<t>This document does not require an action from IANA. | <t pn="section-7-1">This document has no IANA actions. | |||
</t> | </t> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section title="Acknowledgements"> | ||||
<t>The authors wish to thank Lou Berger, David Black, Stewart Bryant, | ||||
Rodney Cummings, Ethan Grossman, Craig Gunther, Marcel Kiessling, | ||||
Rudy Klecka, Jouni Korhonen, Erik Nordmark, Shitanshu Shah, | ||||
Wilfried Steiner, George Swallow, Michael Johas Teener, Pat Thaler, | ||||
Thomas Watteyne, Patrick Wetterwald, Karl Weber, Anca Zamfir, | ||||
for their various contributions to this work. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</middle> | </middle> | |||
<back> | <back> | |||
<references title='Informative References'> | <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-detnet-security" to="DETNET-SECURITY"/> | |||
<displayreference target="I-D.ietf-detnet-ip" to="DETNET-IP"/> | ||||
<?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture'?> | <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework" to="DETNET-F | |||
<?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-detnet-problem-statement'?> | RAMEWORK"/> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-detnet-use-cases'?> | <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls" to="DETNET-MPLS"/> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpls'?> | <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture" to="TSCH-ARCH"/> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-detnet-dp-sol-ip'?> | <references pn="section-8"> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-detnet-security'?> | <name slugifiedName="name-informative-references">Informative References</ | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.2205'?> | name> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.2475'?> | <reference anchor="BUFFERBLOAT" quoteTitle="true" target="https://doi.org/ | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.2914'?> | 10.1145/2063176.2063196" derivedAnchor="BUFFERBLOAT"> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.3168'?> | <front> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.3209'?> | <title>Bufferbloat: Dark Buffers in the Internet</title> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.3550'?> | <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.1145/2063176.2063196"/> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.4301'?> | <seriesInfo name="Communications of the ACM," value="Volume 55, Issue | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.4655'?> | 1"/> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.5921'?> | <author initials="J." surname="Gettys" fullname="Jim Gettys"> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.6372'?> | <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.6658'?> | </author> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.7149'?> | <author initials="K." surname="Nichols" fullname="Kathleen Nichols"> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.7384'?> | <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.7426'?> | </author> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.7554'?> | <date month="January" year="2012"/> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.7567'?> | </front> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.7813'?> | </reference> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.8033'?> | <reference anchor="CCAMP" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/ch | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.8227'?> | arter/" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="CCAMP"> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.8289'?> | <front> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.8402'?> | <title>Common Control and Measurement Plane (ccamp)</title> | |||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.8453'?> | <author> | |||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IETF</organization> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEC62439-3-2016" | </author> | |||
target="https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/24447"> | <date/> | |||
<front> | </front> | |||
<title>IEC 62439-3:2016 Industrial communication networks - Hig | </reference> | |||
h | <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework" quoteTitle="true" | |||
target="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework-02" | ||||
derivedAnchor="DETNET-FRAMEWORK"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>DetNet Data Plane Framework</title> | ||||
<author initials="B" surname="Varga" fullname="Balazs Varga"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J" surname="Farkas" fullname="Janos Farkas"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L" surname="Berger" fullname="Lou Berger"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D" surname="Fedyk" fullname="Don Fedyk"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A" surname="Malis" fullname="Andrew Malis"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S" surname="Bryant" fullname="Stewart Bryant"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J" surname="Korhonen" fullname="Jouni Korhonen"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date month="September" day="13" year="2019"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document provides an overall framework for the Deterministic | ||||
Networking data plane. It covers concepts and considerations that are generall | ||||
y common to any Deterministic Networking data plane specification.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-detnet-data-plane-fr | ||||
amework-02"/> | ||||
<format type="TXT" target="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iet | ||||
f-detnet-data-plane-framework-02.txt"/> | ||||
<refcontent>Work in Progress</refcontent> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="I-D.ietf-detnet-ip" quoteTitle="true" target="https://t | ||||
ools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-detnet-ip-01" derivedAnchor="DETNET-IP"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>DetNet Data Plane: IP</title> | ||||
<author initials="B" surname="Varga" fullname="Balazs Varga"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J" surname="Farkas" fullname="Janos Farkas"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L" surname="Berger" fullname="Lou Berger"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D" surname="Fedyk" fullname="Don Fedyk"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A" surname="Malis" fullname="Andrew Malis"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S" surname="Bryant" fullname="Stewart Bryant"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J" surname="Korhonen" fullname="Jouni Korhonen"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date month="July" day="1" year="2019"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document specifies the Deterministic Networking data plane w | ||||
hen operating in an IP packet switched network.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-detnet-ip-01"/> | ||||
<format type="TXT" target="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iet | ||||
f-detnet-ip-01.txt"/> | ||||
<refcontent>Work in Progress</refcontent> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls" quoteTitle="true" target="https:/ | ||||
/tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-01" derivedAnchor="DETNET-MPLS"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>DetNet Data Plane: MPLS</title> | ||||
<author initials="B" surname="Varga" fullname="Balazs Varga"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J" surname="Farkas" fullname="Janos Farkas"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L" surname="Berger" fullname="Lou Berger"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D" surname="Fedyk" fullname="Don Fedyk"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A" surname="Malis" fullname="Andrew Malis"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S" surname="Bryant" fullname="Stewart Bryant"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J" surname="Korhonen" fullname="Jouni Korhonen"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date month="July" day="1" year="2019"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document specifies the Deterministic Networking data plane w | ||||
hen operating over an MPLS Packet Switched Networks.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-01"/> | ||||
<format type="TXT" target="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iet | ||||
f-detnet-mpls-01.txt"/> | ||||
<refcontent>Work in Progress</refcontent> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="I-D.ietf-detnet-security" quoteTitle="true" target="htt | ||||
ps://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-detnet-security-05" derivedAnchor="DETNET-SE | ||||
CURITY"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Security Considerations</titl | ||||
e> | ||||
<author initials="T" surname="Mizrahi" fullname="Tal Mizrahi"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="E" surname="Grossman" fullname="Ethan Grossman"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A" surname="Hacker" fullname="Andrew Hacker"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S" surname="Das" fullname="Subir Das"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J" surname="Dowdell" fullname="John Dowdell"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="H" surname="Austad" fullname="Henrik Austad"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="K" surname="Stanton" fullname="Kevin Stanton"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="N" surname="Finn" fullname="Norman Finn"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date month="August" day="29" year="2019"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>A deterministic network is one that can carry data flows for real | ||||
- time applications with extremely low data loss rates and bounded latency. Det | ||||
erministic networks have been successfully deployed in real-time operational tec | ||||
hnology (OT) applications for some years (for example [ARINC664P7]). However, s | ||||
uch networks are typically isolated from external access, and thus the security | ||||
threat from external attackers is low. IETF Deterministic Networking (DetNet) s | ||||
pecifies a set of technologies that enable creation of deterministic networks on | ||||
IP-based networks of potentially wide area (on the scale of a corporate network | ||||
) potentially bringing the OT network into contact with Information Technology ( | ||||
IT) traffic and security threats that lie outside of a tightly controlled and bo | ||||
unded area (such as the internals of an aircraft). These DetNet technologies ha | ||||
ve not previously been deployed together on a wide area IP-based network, and th | ||||
us can present security considerations that may be new to IP- based wide area ne | ||||
twork designers. This draft, intended for use by DetNet network designers, prov | ||||
ides insight into these security considerations. In addition, this draft collec | ||||
ts all security- related statements from the various DetNet drafts (Architecture | ||||
, Use Cases, etc) into a single location Section 8.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-detnet-security-05"/ | ||||
> | ||||
<format type="TXT" target="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iet | ||||
f-detnet-security-05.txt"/> | ||||
<refcontent>Work in Progress</refcontent> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEC-62439-3" target="https://webstore.iec.ch/publicatio | ||||
n/24447" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEC-62439-3"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Industrial communication networks - High | ||||
availability automation networks - Part 3: Parallel Redundan cy | availability automation networks - Part 3: Parallel Redundan cy | |||
Protocol (PRP) and High-availability Seamless Redundancy (HS R) | Protocol (PRP) and High-availability Seamless Redundancy (HS R) | |||
</title> | </title> | |||
<author> | <seriesInfo name="TC 65 /" value="SC 65C"/> | |||
<organization>International Electrotechnical Commission ( | <seriesInfo name="IEC" value="62439-3:2016"/> | |||
IEC) | <author> | |||
TC 65/SC 65C - Industrial networks</organization> | <organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEC</organization> | |||
</author> | </author> | |||
<date year="2016" /> | <date month="March" year="2016"/> | |||
</front> | </front> | |||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1AE-2018" | ||||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8585421"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.1AE-2018 MAC Security (MACsec)</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2018" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1CB" | ||||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8091139/"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.1CB-2017 Frame Replication and Elimination | ||||
for Reliability</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2017" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Q-2018" | ||||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8403927"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.1Q-2018 Bridges and Bridged Networks</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2018" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | </reference> | |||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1AE" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/docume | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Qav" | nt/8585421" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1AE"> | |||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5375704/"> | <front> | |||
<front> | <title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area | |||
<title>IEEE Std 802.1Qav-2009 Bridges and Bridged Networks - Amend | networks-Media Access Control (MAC) Security</title> | |||
ment 12: | <seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.1AE-2018"/> | |||
Forwarding and Queuing Enhancements for Time-Sensitive | <author> | |||
Streams</title> | <organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | |||
<author> | </author> | |||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organ | </front> | |||
ization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2009" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Qbu" | ||||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7553415/"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.1Qbu-2016 Bridges and Bridged Networks - Amend | ||||
ment 26: Frame Preemption</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organ | ||||
ization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2016" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Qbv" | ||||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7572858/"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.1Qbv-2015 Bridges and Bridged Networks - Amend | ||||
ment 25: Enhancements for Scheduled Traffic</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organ | ||||
ization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2015" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1BA" | ||||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6032690/"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.1BA-2011 Audio Video Bridging (AVB) Systems | ||||
</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2011" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Qch" | ||||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7961303/"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.1Qch-2017 Bridges and Bridged Netwo | ||||
rks - Amendment 29: Cyclic Queuing and Forwarding</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organ | ||||
ization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2017" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.3-2018" | ||||
target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8457469"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.3-2018 Standard for Ethernet</title | ||||
> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organ | ||||
ization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2018" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.3br" | ||||
target="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7900321/"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Std 802.3br-2016 Standard for Ethernet Amen | ||||
dment 5: | ||||
Specification and Management Parameters for Interspersing Expr | ||||
ess Traffic</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organ | ||||
ization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2016" /> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1TSNTG" target="http://www.ieee802.org/1/tsn | ||||
"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive Networking Task Group</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE Standards Association</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date></date> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="TEAS" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter- | ||||
ietf-teas/"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling Working Group< | ||||
/title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IETF</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date></date> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | </reference> | |||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1BA" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/docume | ||||
<reference anchor="CCAMP" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/char | nt/6032690" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1BA"> | |||
ter-ietf-ccamp/"> | <front> | |||
<front> | <title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area | |||
<title>Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group</title> | networks--Audio Video Bridging (AVB) Systems</title> | |||
<author> | <seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.1BA-2011"/> | |||
<organization>IETF</organization> | <author> | |||
</author> | <organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | |||
<date></date> | </author> | |||
</front> | </front> | |||
</reference> | </reference> | |||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1CB" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/docume | ||||
<reference anchor="BUFFERBLOAT"> | nt/8091139" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1CB"> | |||
<front> | <front> | |||
<title>Bufferbloat: Dark Buffers in the Internet</title> | <title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area | |||
networks--Frame Replication and Elimination for Reliability</ti | ||||
<author fullname="J. Gettys" initials="J." surname="Gettys"></author> | tle> | |||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.1109/IEEESTD.2017.8091139"/> | ||||
<author fullname="K. Nichols" initials="K." surname="Nichols"></author | <seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.1CB-2017"/> | |||
> | <author> | |||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
<date month="January" year="2012" /> | </author> | |||
<date/> | ||||
</front> | </front> | |||
<format octets="Communications of the ACM, Volume 55 Issue 1, Pages 57-6 | ||||
5 " target="https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2063176.2063196" type="PDF" /> | ||||
</reference> | </reference> | |||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Q" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/documen | ||||
</references> | t/8403927" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1Q"> | |||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area | ||||
Network--Bridges and Bridged Networks</title> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.1Q-2018"/> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Qav" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/docum | ||||
ent/5375704" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1Qav"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - | ||||
Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks Amendment 12: Forwarding and | ||||
Queuing Enhancements for Time-Sensitive Streams</title> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.1Qav-2009"/> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Qbu" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/docum | ||||
ent/7553415" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1Qbu"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks -- | ||||
Bridges and Bridged Networks -- Amendment 26: Frame Preemption</tit | ||||
le> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.1Qbu-2016"/> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Qbv" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/docum | ||||
ent/7440741" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1Qbv"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks -- | ||||
Bridges and Bridged Networks - Amendment 25: Enhancements for | ||||
Scheduled Traffic</title> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.1Qbv-2015"/> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1Qch" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/docum | ||||
ent/7961303" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1Qch"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area | ||||
networks--Bridges and Bridged Networks--Amendment | ||||
29: Cyclic Queuing and Forwarding</title> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.1Qch-2017"/> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1TSNTG" target="https://1.ieee802.org/tsn/" quo | ||||
teTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.1TSNTG"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) Task Group</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.3" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document | ||||
/8457469" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.3"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Ethernet</title> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.3-2018"/> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE802.3br" target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/docume | ||||
nt/7900321" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="IEEE802.3br"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Ethernet Amendment 5: | ||||
Specification and Management Parameters for | ||||
Interspersing Express Traffic</title> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="802.3br"/> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC2205" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc220 | ||||
5" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2205"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 Functional Sp | ||||
ecification</title> | ||||
<author initials="R." surname="Braden" fullname="R. Braden" role="edit | ||||
or"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L." surname="Zhang" fullname="L. Zhang"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Berson" fullname="S. Berson"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Herzog" fullname="S. Herzog"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Jamin" fullname="S. Jamin"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="1997" month="September"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This memo describes version 1 of RSVP, a resource reservation set | ||||
up protocol designed for an integrated services Internet. RSVP provides receive | ||||
r-initiated setup of resource reservations for multicast or unicast data flows, | ||||
with good scaling and robustness properties. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2205"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2205"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC2475" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc247 | ||||
5" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2475"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>An Architecture for Differentiated Services</title> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Blake" fullname="S. Blake"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D." surname="Black" fullname="D. Black"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="M." surname="Carlson" fullname="M. Carlson"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="E." surname="Davies" fullname="E. Davies"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="Z." surname="Wang" fullname="Z. Wang"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="W." surname="Weiss" fullname="W. Weiss"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="1998" month="December"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document defines an architecture for implementing scalable s | ||||
ervice differentiation in the Internet. This memo provides information for the | ||||
Internet community.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2475"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2475"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC2914" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc291 | ||||
4" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2914"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Congestion Control Principles</title> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Floyd" fullname="S. Floyd"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2000" month="September"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>The goal of this document is to explain the need for congestion c | ||||
ontrol in the Internet, and to discuss what constitutes correct congestion contr | ||||
ol. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet | ||||
Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="BCP" value="41"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2914"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2914"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC3168" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc316 | ||||
8" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC3168"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP</t | ||||
itle> | ||||
<author initials="K." surname="Ramakrishnan" fullname="K. Ramakrishnan | ||||
"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Floyd" fullname="S. Floyd"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D." surname="Black" fullname="D. Black"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2001" month="September"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This memo specifies the incorporation of ECN (Explicit Congestion | ||||
Notification) to TCP and IP, including ECN's use of two bits in the IP header. | ||||
[STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3168"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3168"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC3209" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc320 | ||||
9" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC3209"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels</title> | ||||
<author initials="D." surname="Awduche" fullname="D. Awduche"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L." surname="Berger" fullname="L. Berger"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D." surname="Gan" fullname="D. Gan"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="T." surname="Li" fullname="T. Li"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="V." surname="Srinivasan" fullname="V. Srinivasan"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="G." surname="Swallow" fullname="G. Swallow"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2001" month="December"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document describes the use of RSVP (Resource Reservation Pro | ||||
tocol), including all the necessary extensions, to establish label-switched path | ||||
s (LSPs) in MPLS (Multi-Protocol Label Switching). Since the flow along an LSP | ||||
is completely identified by the label applied at the ingress node of the path, t | ||||
hese paths may be treated as tunnels. A key application of LSP tunnels is traff | ||||
ic engineering with MPLS as specified in RFC 2702. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3209"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3209"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC3550" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc355 | ||||
0" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC3550"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications</title> | ||||
<author initials="H." surname="Schulzrinne" fullname="H. Schulzrinne"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Casner" fullname="S. Casner"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="R." surname="Frederick" fullname="R. Frederick"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="V." surname="Jacobson" fullname="V. Jacobson"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2003" month="July"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This memorandum describes RTP, the real-time transport protocol. | ||||
RTP provides end-to-end network transport functions suitable for applications t | ||||
ransmitting real-time data, such as audio, video or simulation data, over multic | ||||
ast or unicast network services. RTP does not address resource reservation and | ||||
does not guarantee quality-of- service for real-time services. The data transpo | ||||
rt is augmented by a control protocol (RTCP) to allow monitoring of the data del | ||||
ivery in a manner scalable to large multicast networks, and to provide minimal c | ||||
ontrol and identification functionality. RTP and RTCP are designed to be indepe | ||||
ndent of the underlying transport and network layers. The protocol supports the | ||||
use of RTP-level translators and mixers. Most of the text in this memorandum is | ||||
identical to RFC 1889 which it obsoletes. There are no changes in the packet f | ||||
ormats on the wire, only changes to the rules and algorithms governing how the p | ||||
rotocol is used. The biggest change is an enhancement to the scalable timer algo | ||||
rithm for calculating when to send RTCP packets in order to minimize transmissio | ||||
n in excess of the intended rate when many participants join a session simultane | ||||
ously. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="STD" value="64"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3550"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3550"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC4301" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc430 | ||||
1" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC4301"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol</title> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Kent" fullname="S. Kent"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="K." surname="Seo" fullname="K. Seo"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2005" month="December"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document describes an updated version of the "Security Archi | ||||
tecture for IP", which is designed to provide security services for traffic at t | ||||
he IP layer. This document obsoletes RFC 2401 (November 1998). [STANDARDS-TRAC | ||||
K]</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4301"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4301"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC4655" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc465 | ||||
5" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC4655"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture</title> | ||||
<author initials="A." surname="Farrel" fullname="A. Farrel"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J.-P." surname="Vasseur" fullname="J.-P. Vasseur"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J." surname="Ash" fullname="J. Ash"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2006" month="August"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>Constraint-based path computation is a fundamental building block | ||||
for traffic engineering systems such as Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) an | ||||
d Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks. Path computation | ||||
in large, multi-domain, multi-region, or multi-layer networks is complex and may | ||||
require special computational components and cooperation between the different | ||||
network domains.</t> | ||||
<t>This document specifies the architecture for a Path Computation E | ||||
lement (PCE)-based model to address this problem space. This document does not | ||||
attempt to provide a detailed description of all the architectural components, b | ||||
ut rather it describes a set of building blocks for the PCE architecture from wh | ||||
ich solutions may be constructed. This memo provides information for the Intern | ||||
et community.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4655"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4655"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC6372" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc637 | ||||
2" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6372"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Survivability Framework</title | ||||
> | ||||
<author initials="N." surname="Sprecher" fullname="N. Sprecher" role=" | ||||
editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A." surname="Farrel" fullname="A. Farrel" role="edit | ||||
or"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2011" month="September"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>Network survivability is the ability of a network to recover traf | ||||
fic delivery following failure or degradation of network resources. Survivabili | ||||
ty is critical for the delivery of guaranteed network services, such as those su | ||||
bject to strict Service Level Agreements (SLAs) that place maximum bounds on the | ||||
length of time that services may be degraded or unavailable.</t> | ||||
<t>The Transport Profile of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS-TP) | ||||
is a packet-based transport technology based on the MPLS data plane that reuses | ||||
many aspects of the MPLS management and control planes.</t> | ||||
<t>This document comprises a framework for the provision of survivab | ||||
ility in an MPLS-TP network; it describes recovery elements, types, methods, and | ||||
topological considerations. To enable data-plane recovery, survivability may b | ||||
e supported by the control plane, management plane, and by Operations, Administr | ||||
ation, and Maintenance (OAM) functions. This document describes mechanisms for r | ||||
ecovering MPLS-TP Label Switched Paths (LSPs). A detailed description of pseudo | ||||
wire recovery in MPLS-TP networks is beyond the scope of this document.</t> | ||||
<t>This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task F | ||||
orce (IETF) / International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardiz | ||||
ation Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport Profile within the IETF | ||||
MPLS and Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) architectures to support the | ||||
capabilities and functionalities of a packet-based transport network as defined | ||||
by the ITU-T. </t> | ||||
<t>This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; i | ||||
t is published for informational purposes.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6372"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6372"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC6658" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc665 | ||||
8" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6658"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Packet Pseudowire Encapsulation over an MPLS PSN</title> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Bryant" fullname="S. Bryant" role="edit | ||||
or"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L." surname="Martini" fullname="L. Martini"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="G." surname="Swallow" fullname="G. Swallow"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A." surname="Malis" fullname="A. Malis"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2012" month="July"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document describes a pseudowire mechanism that is used to tr | ||||
ansport a packet service over an MPLS PSN in the case where the client Label Swi | ||||
tching Router (LSR) and the server Provider Edge equipments are co-resident in t | ||||
he same equipment. This pseudowire mechanism may be used to carry all of the re | ||||
quired layer 2 and layer 3 protocols between the pair of client LSRs. [STANDARD | ||||
S-TRACK]</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6658"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6658"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC7149" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc714 | ||||
9" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7149"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Software-Defined Networking: A Perspective from within a Servic | ||||
e Provider Environment</title> | ||||
<author initials="M." surname="Boucadair" fullname="M. Boucadair"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="C." surname="Jacquenet" fullname="C. Jacquenet"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2014" month="March"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>Software-Defined Networking (SDN) has been one of the major buzz | ||||
words of the networking industry for the past couple of years. And yet, no clea | ||||
r definition of what SDN actually covers has been broadly admitted so far. This | ||||
document aims to clarify the SDN landscape by providing a perspective on requir | ||||
ements, issues, and other considerations about SDN, as seen from within a servic | ||||
e provider environment.</t> | ||||
<t>It is not meant to endlessly discuss what SDN truly means but rat | ||||
her to suggest a functional taxonomy of the techniques that can be used under an | ||||
SDN umbrella and to elaborate on the various pending issues the combined activa | ||||
tion of such techniques inevitably raises. As such, a definition of SDN is only | ||||
mentioned for the sake of clarification.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7149"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7149"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC7384" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc738 | ||||
4" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7384"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Security Requirements of Time Protocols in Packet Switched Netw | ||||
orks</title> | ||||
<author initials="T." surname="Mizrahi" fullname="T. Mizrahi"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2014" month="October"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>As time and frequency distribution protocols are becoming increas | ||||
ingly common and widely deployed, concern about their exposure to various securi | ||||
ty threats is increasing. This document defines a set of security requirements | ||||
for time protocols, focusing on the Precision Time Protocol (PTP) and the Networ | ||||
k Time Protocol (NTP). This document also discusses the security impacts of time | ||||
protocol practices, the performance implications of external security practices | ||||
on time protocols, and the dependencies between other security services and tim | ||||
e synchronization.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7384"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7384"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC7426" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc742 | ||||
6" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7426"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Software-Defined Networking (SDN): Layers and Architecture Term | ||||
inology</title> | ||||
<author initials="E." surname="Haleplidis" fullname="E. Haleplidis" ro | ||||
le="editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="K." surname="Pentikousis" fullname="K. Pentikousis" | ||||
role="editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Denazis" fullname="S. Denazis"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J." surname="Hadi Salim" fullname="J. Hadi Salim"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D." surname="Meyer" fullname="D. Meyer"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="O." surname="Koufopavlou" fullname="O. Koufopavlou"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2015" month="January"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>Software-Defined Networking (SDN) refers to a new approach for ne | ||||
twork programmability, that is, the capacity to initialize, control, change, and | ||||
manage network behavior dynamically via open interfaces. SDN emphasizes the ro | ||||
le of software in running networks through the introduction of an abstraction fo | ||||
r the data forwarding plane and, by doing so, separates it from the control plan | ||||
e. This separation allows faster innovation cycles at both planes as experience | ||||
has already shown. However, there is increasing confusion as to what exactly S | ||||
DN is, what the layer structure is in an SDN architecture, and how layers interf | ||||
ace with each other. This document, a product of the IRTF Software-Defined Netw | ||||
orking Research Group (SDNRG), addresses these questions and provides a concise | ||||
reference for the SDN research community based on relevant peer-reviewed literat | ||||
ure, the RFC series, and relevant documents by other standards organizations.</t | ||||
> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7426"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7426"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC7554" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc755 | ||||
4" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7554"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Using IEEE 802.15.4e Time-Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) in the | ||||
Internet of Things (IoT): Problem Statement</title> | ||||
<author initials="T." surname="Watteyne" fullname="T. Watteyne" role=" | ||||
editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="M." surname="Palattella" fullname="M. Palattella"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L." surname="Grieco" fullname="L. Grieco"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2015" month="May"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document describes the environment, problem statement, and g | ||||
oals for using the Time-Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) Medium Access Control (MA | ||||
C) protocol of IEEE 802.14.4e in the context of Low-Power and Lossy Networks (LL | ||||
Ns). The set of goals enumerated in this document form an initial set only.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7554"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7554"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC7567" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc756 | ||||
7" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7567"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IETF Recommendations Regarding Active Queue Management</title> | ||||
<author initials="F." surname="Baker" fullname="F. Baker" role="editor | ||||
"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="G." surname="Fairhurst" fullname="G. Fairhurst" role | ||||
="editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2015" month="July"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This memo presents recommendations to the Internet community conc | ||||
erning measures to improve and preserve Internet performance. It presents a str | ||||
ong recommendation for testing, standardization, and widespread deployment of ac | ||||
tive queue management (AQM) in network devices to improve the performance of tod | ||||
ay's Internet. It also urges a concerted effort of research, measurement, and u | ||||
ltimate deployment of AQM mechanisms to protect the Internet from flows that are | ||||
not sufficiently responsive to congestion notification.</t> | ||||
<t>Based on 15 years of experience and new research, this document r | ||||
eplaces the recommendations of RFC 2309.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="BCP" value="197"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7567"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7567"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC7813" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc781 | ||||
3" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7813"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>IS-IS Path Control and Reservation</title> | ||||
<author initials="J." surname="Farkas" fullname="J. Farkas" role="edit | ||||
or"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="N." surname="Bragg" fullname="N. Bragg"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="P." surname="Unbehagen" fullname="P. Unbehagen"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="G." surname="Parsons" fullname="G. Parsons"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="P." surname="Ashwood-Smith" fullname="P. Ashwood-Smi | ||||
th"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="C." surname="Bowers" fullname="C. Bowers"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2016" month="June"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>IEEE 802.1Qca Path Control and Reservation (PCR) specifies explic | ||||
it path control via IS-IS in Layer 2 networks in order to move beyond the shorte | ||||
st path capabilities provided by IEEE 802.1aq Shortest Path Bridging (SPB). IS- | ||||
IS PCR provides capabilities for the establishment and control of explicit forwa | ||||
rding trees in a Layer 2 network domain. This document specifies the sub-TLVs f | ||||
or IS-IS PCR.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7813"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7813"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC8033" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc803 | ||||
3" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8033"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Proportional Integral Controller Enhanced (PIE): A Lightweight | ||||
Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem</title> | ||||
<author initials="R." surname="Pan" fullname="R. Pan"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="P." surname="Natarajan" fullname="P. Natarajan"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="F." surname="Baker" fullname="F. Baker"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="G." surname="White" fullname="G. White"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2017" month="February"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>Bufferbloat is a phenomenon in which excess buffers in the networ | ||||
k cause high latency and latency variation. As more and more interactive applic | ||||
ations (e.g., voice over IP, real-time video streaming, and financial transactio | ||||
ns) run in the Internet, high latency and latency variation degrade application | ||||
performance. There is a pressing need to design intelligent queue management sc | ||||
hemes that can control latency and latency variation, and hence provide desirabl | ||||
e quality of service to users.</t> | ||||
<t>This document presents a lightweight active queue management desi | ||||
gn called "PIE" (Proportional Integral controller Enhanced) that can effectively | ||||
control the average queuing latency to a target value. Simulation results, theo | ||||
retical analysis, and Linux testbed results have shown that PIE can ensure low l | ||||
atency and achieve high link utilization under various congestion situations. T | ||||
he design does not require per-packet timestamps, so it incurs very little overh | ||||
ead and is simple enough to implement in both hardware and software.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8033"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8033"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC8227" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc822 | ||||
7" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8227"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>MPLS-TP Shared-Ring Protection (MSRP) Mechanism for Ring Topolo | ||||
gy</title> | ||||
<author initials="W." surname="Cheng" fullname="W. Cheng"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L." surname="Wang" fullname="L. Wang"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="H." surname="Li" fullname="H. Li"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="H." surname="van Helvoort" fullname="H. van Helvoort | ||||
"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J." surname="Dong" fullname="J. Dong"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2017" month="August"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document describes requirements, architecture, and solutions | ||||
for MPLS-TP Shared-Ring Protection (MSRP) in a ring topology for point- to-poin | ||||
t (P2P) services. The MSRP mechanism is described to meet the ring protection r | ||||
equirements as described in RFC 5654. This document defines the Ring Protection | ||||
Switching (RPS) protocol that is used to coordinate the protection behavior of | ||||
the nodes on an MPLS ring.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8227"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8227"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC8289" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc828 | ||||
9" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8289"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Controlled Delay Active Queue Management</title> | ||||
<author initials="K." surname="Nichols" fullname="K. Nichols"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="V." surname="Jacobson" fullname="V. Jacobson"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A." surname="McGregor" fullname="A. McGregor" role=" | ||||
editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J." surname="Iyengar" fullname="J. Iyengar" role="ed | ||||
itor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2018" month="January"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document describes CoDel (Controlled Delay) -- a general fra | ||||
mework that controls bufferbloat-generated excess delay in modern networking env | ||||
ironments. CoDel consists of an estimator, a setpoint, and a control loop. It | ||||
requires no configuration in normal Internet deployments.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8289"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8289"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC8402" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc840 | ||||
2" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8402"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Segment Routing Architecture</title> | ||||
<author initials="C." surname="Filsfils" fullname="C. Filsfils" role=" | ||||
editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Previdi" fullname="S. Previdi" role="ed | ||||
itor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="L." surname="Ginsberg" fullname="L. Ginsberg"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="B." surname="Decraene" fullname="B. Decraene"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Litkowski" fullname="S. Litkowski"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="R." surname="Shakir" fullname="R. Shakir"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2018" month="July"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. A no | ||||
de steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions, called "segments". | ||||
A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. A segmen | ||||
t can have a semantic local to an SR node or global within an SR domain. SR pro | ||||
vides a mechanism that allows a flow to be restricted to a specific topological | ||||
path, while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node(s) to the SR dom | ||||
ain.</t> | ||||
<t>SR can be directly applied to the MPLS architecture with no chang | ||||
e to the forwarding plane. A segment is encoded as an MPLS label. An ordered l | ||||
ist of segments is encoded as a stack of labels. The segment to process is on t | ||||
he top of the stack. Upon completion of a segment, the related label is popped | ||||
from the stack.</t> | ||||
<t>SR can be applied to the IPv6 architecture, with a new type of ro | ||||
uting header. A segment is encoded as an IPv6 address. An ordered list of segm | ||||
ents is encoded as an ordered list of IPv6 addresses in the routing header. The | ||||
active segment is indicated by the Destination Address (DA) of the packet. The | ||||
next active segment is indicated by a pointer in the new routing header.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8402"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8402"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC8453" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc845 | ||||
3" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8453"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Framework for Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN)</ti | ||||
tle> | ||||
<author initials="D." surname="Ceccarelli" fullname="D. Ceccarelli" ro | ||||
le="editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2018" month="August"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>Traffic Engineered (TE) networks have a variety of mechanisms to | ||||
facilitate the separation of the data plane and control plane. They also have a | ||||
range of management and provisioning protocols to configure and activate networ | ||||
k resources. These mechanisms represent key technologies for enabling flexible | ||||
and dynamic networking. The term "Traffic Engineered network" refers to a netwo | ||||
rk that uses any connection-oriented technology under the control of a distribut | ||||
ed or centralized control plane to support dynamic provisioning of end-to- end c | ||||
onnectivity.</t> | ||||
<t>Abstraction of network resources is a technique that can be appli | ||||
ed to a single network domain or across multiple domains to create a single virt | ||||
ualized network that is under the control of a network operator or the customer | ||||
of the operator that actually owns the network resources.</t> | ||||
<t>This document provides a framework for Abstraction and Control of | ||||
TE Networks (ACTN) to support virtual network services and connectivity service | ||||
s.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8453"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8453"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC8557" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc855 | ||||
7" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8557"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Deterministic Networking Problem Statement</title> | ||||
<author initials="N." surname="Finn" fullname="N. Finn"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="P." surname="Thubert" fullname="P. Thubert"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2019" month="May"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This paper documents the needs in various industries to establish | ||||
multi-hop paths for characterized flows with deterministic properties.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8557"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8557"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="RFC8578" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc857 | ||||
8" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8578"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Deterministic Networking Use Cases</title> | ||||
<author initials="E." surname="Grossman" fullname="E. Grossman" role=" | ||||
editor"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2019" month="May"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document presents use cases for diverse industries that have | ||||
in common a need for "deterministic flows". "Deterministic" in this context me | ||||
ans that such flows provide guaranteed bandwidth, bounded latency, and other pro | ||||
perties germane to the transport of time-sensitive data. These use cases differ | ||||
notably in their network topologies and specific desired behavior, providing as | ||||
a group broad industry context for Deterministic Networking (DetNet). For each | ||||
use case, this document will identify the use case, identify representative sol | ||||
utions used today, and describe potential improvements that DetNet can enable.</ | ||||
t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8578"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8578"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="TEAS" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter- | ||||
ietf-teas/" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="TEAS"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling (teas)</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">IETF</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date/> | ||||
</front> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture" quoteTitle="true" target= | ||||
"https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-26" derivedAnchor="T | ||||
SCH-ARCH"> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title>An Architecture for IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4</t | ||||
itle> | ||||
<author initials="P" surname="Thubert" fullname="Pascal Thubert"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date month="August" day="27" year="2019"/> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t>This document describes a network architecture that provides low- | ||||
latency, low-jitter and high-reliability packet delivery. It combines a high-s | ||||
peed powered backbone and subnetworks using IEEE 802.15.4 time-slotted channel h | ||||
opping (TSCH) to meet the requirements of LowPower wireless deterministic applic | ||||
ations.</t> | ||||
</abstract> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture- | ||||
26"/> | ||||
<format type="TXT" target="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iet | ||||
f-6tisch-architecture-26.txt"/> | ||||
<refcontent>Work in Progress</refcontent> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
</references> | ||||
<section numbered="false" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appe | ||||
ndix.a"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-acknowledgements">Acknowledgements</name> | ||||
<t pn="section-appendix.a-1">The authors wish to thank Lou Berger, David B | ||||
lack, Stewart | ||||
Bryant, Rodney Cummings, Ethan Grossman, Craig Gunther, Marcel | ||||
Kiessling, Rudy Klecka, Jouni Korhonen, Erik Nordmark, Shitanshu | ||||
Shah, Wilfried Steiner, George Swallow, Michael Johas Teener, Pat | ||||
Thaler, Thomas Watteyne, Patrick Wetterwald, Karl Weber, and Anca | ||||
Zamfir for their various contributions to this work. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="authors-addresses" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc | ||||
="include" pn="section-appendix.b"> | ||||
<name slugifiedName="name-authors-addresses">Authors' Addresses</name> | ||||
<author initials="N" surname="Finn" fullname="Norman Finn"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">Huawei</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<postal> | ||||
<street>3101 Rio Way</street> | ||||
<city>Spring Valley</city> | ||||
<region>California</region> | ||||
<code>91977</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<phone>+1 925 980 6430</phone> | ||||
<email>nfinn@nfinnconsulting.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="P" surname="Thubert" fullname="Pascal Thubert"> | ||||
<organization abbrev="Cisco" showOnFrontPage="true"> | ||||
Cisco Systems | ||||
</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<postal> | ||||
<street>Village d'Entreprises Green Side</street> | ||||
<street>400, Avenue de Roumanille</street> | ||||
<street> Batiment T3</street> | ||||
<city>Biot - Sophia Antipolis</city> | ||||
<code>06410</code> | ||||
<country>France</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<phone>+33 4 97 23 26 34</phone> | ||||
<email>pthubert@cisco.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author fullname="Balázs Varga" initials="B." surname="Varga"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">Ericsson</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<postal> | ||||
<street>Magyar tudosok korutja 11</street> | ||||
<city>Budapest</city> | ||||
<country>Hungary</country> | ||||
<code>1117</code> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<email>balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author fullname="János Farkas" initials="J." surname="Farkas"> | ||||
<organization showOnFrontPage="true">Ericsson</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<postal> | ||||
<street>Magyar tudosok korutja 11</street> | ||||
<city>Budapest</city> | ||||
<country>Hungary</country> | ||||
<code>1117</code> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<email>janos.farkas@ericsson.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</back> | </back> | |||
</rfc> | </rfc> | |||
End of changes. 133 change blocks. | ||||
2308 lines changed or deleted | 3516 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |