Hello Behcet:


Le lun. 7 juil. 2025 à 16:30, Behcet Sarikaya <[email protected]> a
écrit :

>
>
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 2:10 AM Pascal Thubert <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Behcet :)
>>
>> long time! Many thanks for your review!
>>
>
> Sure.
>
>>
>> I placed proposed changes in GitHub at
>> https://github.com/raw-wg/raw-architecture/commit/0b13749fa529a4282732d8c6fc411689ce75b4a7
>>
>>
>> Please see below:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Summary:
>>>
>>> This draft reliable and available wireless architecture in the context of
>>> deterministic networking or DetNet, i.e. the draft
>>>
>>> complements DetNet for wireless.
>>>
>>> Overall, it is a good document, involving huge amount of work,
>>> especially I
>>> liked Section 3.1.1.1 3rd and 4th paragraphs explaining wireless single
>>> point
>>> of failure.
>>>
>>> However it has a number of typos and issues.
>>>
>>> Major issues:N/A
>>>
>>> Minor issues:
>>>
>>> It seems like on DetNet there is currently ongoing research and
>>> development
>>> involving TSN in IEEE 802.1 and IETF. I suggest that the document makes
>>> it
>>> clear that Sections 4 and 5 describe roughly a design which needs to be
>>> implemented together with TSN as part of link layer.
>>>
>>>
>> Makes sense; First paragraph of section 4.3 becomes:
>> "
>> 4.3.  RAW and DetNet
>>
>>    RAW leverages the DetNet Forwarding sub-layer and requires the
>>    support of OAM in DetNet Transit Nodes (see figure 3 of
>>    [DetNet-ARCHI] for the dynamic acquisition of link capacity and state
>>    to maintain a strict RAW service, end-to-end, over a DetNet Network.
>>    In turn, DetNet and thus RAW may benefit from / leverage
>>    functionality such as provided by TSN at the lower layers.
>>  "
>>
>> Nits/editorial comments:
>>>
>>> Issues:
>>> Many typos:
>>> Sec. 2 controled -> controlled
>>> 2.1.6 massage & 2.1.6 massaged -> message
>>> 3.2 recieve -> receive
>>> The assumption us -> is
>>> Along a alternative paths -> along alternative paths
>>> 5.1 fucntion -> function
>>>
>>> done
>>
>>
>>> Please check, possibly reword:
>>> 3.1.1.1 2nd par.
>>>
>>> edited as:
>> "
>>
>>    IP Routers leverage routing protocols to reroute to alternate routes
>>    in case of a failure.  When links are cabled through the same
>>    conduit, they form a shared risk link group (SRLG), and share the
>>    same fate if the conduit is cut, making the reroute operation
>>    ineffective.  The same effect can happen with virtual links that end
>>    up in a same physical transport through the intricacies of nested
>>    encapsulation.  In a same fashion, an interferer or an obstacle may
>>    affect multiple wireless transmissions at the same time, even between
>>    different sets of peers..
>> "
>>
>>
>>
>>> Through the games of encapsulation
>>>
>> removed "games"
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 3.2 OODA list Point 2
>>> may also generate knowledge and wisdom such as a trained model for link
>>> quality
>>> prediction
>>>
>>
>> Sorry what should I do here ?
>>
>>
>
> I think you meant machine learning or ML models here, so I suggested
> making it specific.
>
>
>
>>
>>> On Fig. 6 is there or not tunneling on strict RAW over Detnet?
>>>
>>>
>> No, that's the difference with fig 7 where RAW may traverse an uncertain
>> area, in which case packets may arrive too late and be discarded.
>>
>>
>
> Isn't it true that in the core network there is a tunnel (like MPLS
> tunnel) somewhere? I suggested mentioning it here, just a suggestion.
>

Not in the case of DetNet, you have to be DetNet end to end. In fig 7 we
tunnel between 2 DetNet forwarding islands but the tunnel is not across
a DetNet land..


>
>
>> 5.1
>>> SD-WAN
>>> MPLS-TP undefined
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Done
>>
>> Again, many thanks for your review. Please let me know if more changes
>> are in order.
>>
>> Please see above.
>
> Behcet
>
>> all the best,
>>
>> --
>> Pascal
>>
>
Mnny thanks,
-- 
Pascal
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to