draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-03.txt   draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-04.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force E. Grossman, Ed. Internet Engineering Task Force E. Grossman, Ed.
Internet-Draft DOLBY Internet-Draft DOLBY
Intended status: Informational C. Gunther Intended status: Informational C. Gunther
Expires: August 19, 2016 HARMAN Expires: August 25, 2016 HARMAN
P. Thubert P. Thubert
P. Wetterwald P. Wetterwald
CISCO CISCO
J. Raymond J. Raymond
HYDRO-QUEBEC HYDRO-QUEBEC
J. Korhonen J. Korhonen
BROADCOM BROADCOM
Y. Kaneko Y. Kaneko
Toshiba Toshiba
S. Das S. Das
Applied Communication Sciences Applied Communication Sciences
Y. Zha Y. Zha
HUAWEI HUAWEI
B. Varga B. Varga
J. Farkas J. Farkas
Ericsson Ericsson
F. Goetz F. Goetz
J. Schmitt J. Schmitt
Siemens Siemens
February 16, 2016 February 22, 2016
Deterministic Networking Use Cases Deterministic Networking Use Cases
draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-03 draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-04
Abstract Abstract
This draft documents requirements in several diverse industries to This draft documents requirements in several diverse industries to
establish multi-hop paths for characterized flows with deterministic establish multi-hop paths for characterized flows with deterministic
properties. In this context deterministic implies that streams can properties. In this context deterministic implies that streams can
be established which provide guaranteed bandwidth and latency which be established which provide guaranteed bandwidth and latency which
can be established from either a Layer 2 or Layer 3 (IP) interface, can be established from either a Layer 2 or Layer 3 (IP) interface,
and which can co-exist on an IP network with best-effort traffic. and which can co-exist on an IP network with best-effort traffic.
skipping to change at page 2, line 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 19, 2016. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 25, 2016.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 43 skipping to change at page 2, line 43
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Pro Audio Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Pro Audio Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. Fundamental Stream Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.2. Fundamental Stream Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2.1. Guaranteed Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.2.1. Guaranteed Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.2. Bounded and Consistent Latency . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2.2. Bounded and Consistent Latency . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.2.1. Optimizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.2.2.1. Optimizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.3. Additional Stream Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3. Additional Stream Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3.1. Deterministic Time to Establish Streaming . . . . . . 9 2.3.1. Deterministic Time to Establish Streaming . . . . . . 9
2.3.2. Use of Unused Reservations by Best-Effort Traffic . . 9 2.3.2. Use of Unused Reservations by Best-Effort Traffic . . 9
2.3.3. Layer 3 Interconnecting Layer 2 Islands . . . . . . . 10 2.3.3. Layer 3 Interconnecting Layer 2 Islands . . . . . . . 10
2.3.4. Secure Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3.4. Secure Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3.5. Redundant Paths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3.5. Redundant Paths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3.6. Link Aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3.6. Link Aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.7. Traffic Segregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.3.7. Traffic Segregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.7.1. Packet Forwarding Rules, VLANs and Subnets . . . 11 2.3.7.1. Packet Forwarding Rules, VLANs and Subnets . . . 11
2.3.7.2. Multicast Addressing (IPv4 and IPv6) . . . . . . 11 2.3.7.2. Multicast Addressing (IPv4 and IPv6) . . . . . . 11
2.4. Integration of Reserved Streams into IT Networks . . . . 12 2.4. Integration of Reserved Streams into IT Networks . . . . 12
2.5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5.1. Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.5.1. Denial of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5.2. Control Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.5.2. Control Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.6. A State-of-the-Art Broadcast Installation Hits Technology 2.6. A State-of-the-Art Broadcast Installation Hits Technology
Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3. Utility Telecom Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3. Utility Telecom Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
skipping to change at page 4, line 21 skipping to change at page 4, line 21
5.5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 5.5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6. Cellular Radio Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 6. Cellular Radio Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 6.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.1.1. Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 6.1.1. Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.1.2. Time Synchronization Requirements . . . . . . . . . . 55 6.1.2. Time Synchronization Requirements . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.1.3. Time-Sensitive Stream Requirements . . . . . . . . . 57 6.1.3. Time-Sensitive Stream Requirements . . . . . . . . . 57
6.1.4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6.1.4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2. Cellular Radio Networks Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 6.2. Cellular Radio Networks Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.3. Cellular Radio Networks Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 6.3. Cellular Radio Networks Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.4. Cellular Radio Networks Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 6.4. Cellular Radio Networks Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
7. Industrial M2M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 7. Cellular Coordinated Multipoint Processing (CoMP) . . . . . . 60
7.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 7.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
7.2. Industrial M2M Communication Today . . . . . . . . . . . 62 7.1.1. CoMP Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
7.2.1. Transport Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 7.1.2. Delay Sensitivity in CoMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
7.2.2. Stream Creation and Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . 63 7.2. CoMP Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
7.3. Industrial M2M Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 7.3. CoMP Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
7.4. Industrial M2M Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 7.3.1. Mobile Industry Overall Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
8. Other Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 7.3.2. CoMP Infrastructure Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
8.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 7.4. CoMP Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
8.2. Critical Delay Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 8. Industrial M2M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
8.3. Coordinated multipoint processing (CoMP) . . . . . . . . 65 8.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
8.3.1. CoMP Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 8.2. Industrial M2M Communication Today . . . . . . . . . . . 65
8.3.2. Delay Sensitivity in CoMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 8.2.1. Transport Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
8.4. Industrial Automation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 8.2.2. Stream Creation and Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . 66
8.5. Vehicle to Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 8.3. Industrial M2M Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
8.6. Gaming, Media and Virtual Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 8.4. Industrial M2M Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
9. Use Case Common Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 9. Internet-based Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 9.1. Use Case Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
10.1. Pro Audio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 9.1.1. Media Content Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
10.2. Utility Telecom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 9.1.2. Online Gaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
10.3. Building Automation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 9.1.3. Virtual Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
10.4. Wireless for Industrial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 9.2. Internet-Based Applications Today . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
10.5. Cellular Radio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 9.3. Internet-Based Applications Future . . . . . . . . . . . 68
10.6. Industrial M2M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 9.4. Internet-Based Applications Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
10.7. Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 10. Use Case Common Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
11. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
11.1. Pro Audio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
11.2. Utility Telecom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
11.3. Building Automation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
11.4. Wireless for Industrial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
11.5. Cellular Radio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
11.6. Industrial M2M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
11.7. Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
12. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This draft presents use cases from diverse industries which have in This draft presents use cases from diverse industries which have in
common a need for deterministic streams, but which also differ common a need for deterministic streams, but which also differ
notably in their network topologies and specific desired behavior. notably in their network topologies and specific desired behavior.
Together, they provide broad industry context for DetNet and a Together, they provide broad industry context for DetNet and a
yardstick against which proposed DetNet designs can be measured (to yardstick against which proposed DetNet designs can be measured (to
what extent does a proposed design satisfy these various use cases?) what extent does a proposed design satisfy these various use cases?)
skipping to change at page 55, line 5 skipping to change at page 54, line 49
6.1.1. Network Architecture 6.1.1. Network Architecture
Figure 9 illustrates a typical 3GPP-defined cellular network Figure 9 illustrates a typical 3GPP-defined cellular network
architecture, which includes "Fronthaul" and "Midhaul" network architecture, which includes "Fronthaul" and "Midhaul" network
segments. The "Fronthaul" is the network connecting base stations segments. The "Fronthaul" is the network connecting base stations
(baseband processing units) to the remote radio heads (antennas). (baseband processing units) to the remote radio heads (antennas).
The "Midhaul" is the network inter-connecting base stations (or small The "Midhaul" is the network inter-connecting base stations (or small
cell sites). cell sites).
In Figure 9 "eNB" ("E-UTRAN Node B") is the hardware that is
connected to the mobile phone network which communicates directly
with mobile handsets ([TS36300]).
Y (remote radio heads (antennas)) Y (remote radio heads (antennas))
\ \
Y__ \.--. .--. +------+ Y__ \.--. .--. +------+
\_( `. +---+ _(Back`. | 3GPP | \_( `. +---+ _(Back`. | 3GPP |
Y------( Front )----|eNB|----( Haul )----| core | Y------( Front )----|eNB|----( Haul )----| core |
( ` .Haul ) +---+ ( ` . ) ) | netw | ( ` .Haul ) +---+ ( ` . ) ) | netw |
/`--(___.-' \ `--(___.-' +------+ /`--(___.-' \ `--(___.-' +------+
Y_/ / \.--. \ Y_/ / \.--. \
Y_/ _( Mid`. \ Y_/ _( Mid`. \
( Haul ) \ ( Haul ) \
skipping to change at page 60, line 44 skipping to change at page 60, line 44
Ethernet layer) Ethernet layer)
Mapping the Fronthaul requirements to IETF DetNet Mapping the Fronthaul requirements to IETF DetNet
[I-D.finn-detnet-architecture] Section 3 "Providing the DetNet [I-D.finn-detnet-architecture] Section 3 "Providing the DetNet
Quality of Service", the relevant features are: Quality of Service", the relevant features are:
o Zero congestion loss. o Zero congestion loss.
o Pinned-down paths. o Pinned-down paths.
7. Industrial M2M 7. Cellular Coordinated Multipoint Processing (CoMP)
7.1. Use Case Description 7.1. Use Case Description
In cellular wireless communication systems, Inter-Site Coordinated
Multipoint Processing (CoMP, see [CoMP]) is a technique implemented
within a cell site which improves system efficiency and user quality
experience by significantly improving throughput in the cell-edge
region (i.e. at the edges of that cell site's radio coverage area).
CoMP techniques depend on deterministic high-reliability
communication between cell sites, however such connections today are
IP-based which in current mobile networks can not meet the QoS
requirements, so CoMP is an emerging technology which can benefit
from DetNet.
Here we consider the JT (Joint Transmit) application for CoMP, which
provides the highest performance gain (compared to other
applications).
7.1.1. CoMP Architecture
+--------------------------+
| CoMP |
+--+--------------------+--+
| |
+----------+ +------------+
| Uplink | | Downlink |
+-----+----+ +--------+---+
| |
------------------- -----------------------
| | | | | |
+---------+ +----+ +-----+ +------------+ +-----+ +-----+
| Joint | | CS | | DPS | | Joint | | CS/ | | DPS |
|Reception| | | | | |Transmission| | CB | | |
+---------+ +----+ +-----+ +------------+ +-----+ +-----+
| |
|----------- |-------------
| | | |
+------------+ +---------+ +----------+ +------------+
| Joint | | Soft | | Coherent | | Non- |
|Equalization| |Combining| | JT | | Coherent JT|
+------------+ +---------+ +----------+ +------------+
Figure 10: Framework of CoMP Technology
As shown in Figure 10, CoMP reception and transmission is a framework
in which multiple geographically distributed antenna nodes cooperate
to improve the performance of the users served in the common
cooperation area. The design principal of CoMP is to extend the
current single-cell to multi-UE (User Equipment) transmission to a
multi-cell- to-multi-UEs transmission by base station cooperation.
7.1.2. Delay Sensitivity in CoMP
In contrast to the single-cell scenario, CoMP has delay-sensitive
performance parameters, which are "backhaul latency" and "CSI
(Channel State Information) reporting and accuracy". The essential
feature of CoMP is signaling between eNBs, so the backhaul latency is
the dominating limitation of the CoMP performance. Generally, JT can
benefit from coordinated scheduling (either distributed or
centralized) of different cells if the signaling delay between eNBs
is within 4-10ms. This delay requirement is both rigid and absolute
because any uncertainty in delay will degrade the performance
significantly.
7.2. CoMP Today
Due to the strict sensitivity to latency and synchronization, CoMP
between eNB has not been deployed yet. This is because the current
interface path between eNBs cannot meet the delay bound because it is
usually IP-based and passing through multiple network hops (this
interface is called "X2" or "eX2" for "enhanced X2"). Today lack of
absolute delay guarantee on X2/eX2 traffic is the main obstacle to JT
and multi-eNB coordination.
There is still lack of Layer-3 (IP) transport protocol and signaling
that is capable of low latency services; current techniques such as
MPLS and PWE focus on establishing circuits using pre-routed paths
but there is no such signaling for reservation of time-sensitive
stream.
7.3. CoMP Future
7.3.1. Mobile Industry Overall Goals
[METIS] documents the fundamental challenges as well as overall
technical goals of the 5G mobile and wireless system as the starting
point. These future systems should support (at similar cost and
energy consumption levels as today's system):
o 1000 times higher mobile data volume per area
o 10 times to 100 times higher typical user data rate
o 10 times to 100 times higher number of connected devices
o 10 times longer battery life for low power devices
o 5 times reduced End-to-End (E2E) latency
The current LTE networking system has E2E latency less than 20ms
[LTE-Latency] which leads to around 5ms E2E latency for 5G networks.
To fulfill these latency demands at similar cost will be challenging
because as the system also requires 100x bandwidth and 100x connected
devices, simply adding redundant bandwidth provisioning can no longer
be an efficient solution.
In addition to bandwidth provisioning, reserved critical flows should
not be affected by other flows no matter the pressure of the network.
Deterministic networking techniques in both layer-2 and layer-3 using
IETF protocol solutions can be promising to serve these scenarios.
7.3.2. CoMP Infrastructure Goals
Inter-site CoMP is one of the key requirements for 5G and is also a
near-term goal for the current 4.5G network architecture. Assuming
network architecture remains unchanged (i.e. no Fronthaul network and
data flow between eNB is via X2/eX2) we would like to see the
following in the near future:
o Unified protocols and delay-guaranteed forwarding network
equipment that is capable of delivering deterministic latency
services.
o Unified management and protocols which take delay and timing into
account.
o Unified deterministic latency data model and signaling for
resource reservation.
7.4. CoMP Asks
To fully utilize the power of CoMP, it requires:
o Very tight absolute delay bound (100-500us) within 7-10 hops.
o Standardized data plane with highly deterministic networking
capability.
o Standardized control plane to unify backhaul network elements with
time-sensitive stream reservation signaling.
In addition, a standardized deterministic latency data flow model
that includes:
o Network-aware constraints on the networking environment
o Time-aware description of flow characteristics and network
resources, which may not need to be bandwidth based
o Application-aware description of deterministic latency services.
8. Industrial M2M
8.1. Use Case Description
Industrial Automation in general refers to automation of Industrial Automation in general refers to automation of
manufacturing, quality control and material processing. In this manufacturing, quality control and material processing. In this
"machine to machine" (M2M) use case we consider machine units in a "machine to machine" (M2M) use case we consider machine units in a
plant floor which periodically exchange data with upstream or plant floor which periodically exchange data with upstream or
downstream machine modules and/or a supervisory controller within a downstream machine modules and/or a supervisory controller within a
local area network. local area network.
The actors of M2M communication are Programmable Logic Controllers The actors of M2M communication are Programmable Logic Controllers
(PLCs). Communication between PLCs and between PLCs and the (PLCs). Communication between PLCs and between PLCs and the
supervisory PLC (S-PLC) is achieved via critical control/data streams supervisory PLC (S-PLC) is achieved via critical control/data streams
Figure 10. Figure 11.
S (Sensor) S (Sensor)
\ +-----+ \ +-----+
PLC__ \.--. .--. ---| MES | PLC__ \.--. .--. ---| MES |
\_( `. _( `./ +-----+ \_( `. _( `./ +-----+
A------( Local )-------------( L2 ) A------( Local )-------------( L2 )
( Net ) ( Net ) +-------+ ( Net ) ( Net ) +-------+
/`--(___.-' `--(___.-' ----| S-PLC | /`--(___.-' `--(___.-' ----| S-PLC |
S_/ / PLC .--. / +-------+ S_/ / PLC .--. / +-------+
A_/ \_( `. A_/ \_( `.
(Actuator) ( Local ) (Actuator) ( Local )
( Net ) ( Net )
/`--(___.-'\ /`--(___.-'\
/ \ A / \ A
S A S A
Figure 10: Current Generic Industrial M2M Network Architecture Figure 11: Current Generic Industrial M2M Network Architecture
This use case focuses on PLC-related communications; communication to This use case focuses on PLC-related communications; communication to
Manufacturing-Execution-Systems (MESs) are not addressed. Manufacturing-Execution-Systems (MESs) are not addressed.
This use case covers only critical control/data streams; non-critical This use case covers only critical control/data streams; non-critical
traffic between industrial automation applications (such as traffic between industrial automation applications (such as
communication of state, configuration, set-up, and database communication of state, configuration, set-up, and database
communication) are adequately served by currently available communication) are adequately served by currently available
prioritizing techniques. Such traffic can use up to 80% of the total prioritizing techniques. Such traffic can use up to 80% of the total
bandwidth required. There is also a subset of non-time-critical bandwidth required. There is also a subset of non-time-critical
skipping to change at page 62, line 5 skipping to change at page 65, line 18
provide end-to-end delivery of M2M messages within specific timing provide end-to-end delivery of M2M messages within specific timing
constraints, for example in closed loop automation control. Today constraints, for example in closed loop automation control. Today
this level of determinism is provided by proprietary networking this level of determinism is provided by proprietary networking
technologies. In addition, standard networking technologies are used technologies. In addition, standard networking technologies are used
to connect the local network to remote industrial automation sites, to connect the local network to remote industrial automation sites,
e.g. over an enterprise or metro network which also carries other e.g. over an enterprise or metro network which also carries other
types of traffic. Therefore, flows that should be forwarded with types of traffic. Therefore, flows that should be forwarded with
deterministic guarantees need to be sustained regardless of the deterministic guarantees need to be sustained regardless of the
amount of other flows in those networks. amount of other flows in those networks.
7.2. Industrial M2M Communication Today 8.2. Industrial M2M Communication Today
Today, proprietary networks fulfill the needed timing and Today, proprietary networks fulfill the needed timing and
availability for M2M networks. availability for M2M networks.
The network topologies used today by industrial automation are The network topologies used today by industrial automation are
similar to those used by telecom networks: Daisy Chain, Ring, Hub and similar to those used by telecom networks: Daisy Chain, Ring, Hub and
Spoke, and Comb (a subset of Daisy Chain). Spoke, and Comb (a subset of Daisy Chain).
PLC-related control/data streams are transmitted periodically and PLC-related control/data streams are transmitted periodically and
carry either a pre-configured payload or a payload configured during carry either a pre-configured payload or a payload configured during
skipping to change at page 62, line 29 skipping to change at page 65, line 42
nodes. For such time-coordinated PLCs, accuracy of 1 microsecond is nodes. For such time-coordinated PLCs, accuracy of 1 microsecond is
required. Even in the case of "non-time-coordinated" PLCs time sync required. Even in the case of "non-time-coordinated" PLCs time sync
may be needed e.g. for timestamping of sensor data. may be needed e.g. for timestamping of sensor data.
Industrial network scenarios require advanced security solutions. Industrial network scenarios require advanced security solutions.
Many of the current industrial production networks are physically Many of the current industrial production networks are physically
separated. Preventing critical flows from be leaked outside a domain separated. Preventing critical flows from be leaked outside a domain
is handled today by filtering policies that are typically enforced in is handled today by filtering policies that are typically enforced in
firewalls. firewalls.
7.2.1. Transport Parameters 8.2.1. Transport Parameters
The Cycle Time defines the frequency of message(s) between industrial The Cycle Time defines the frequency of message(s) between industrial
actors. The Cycle Time is application dependent, in the range of 1ms actors. The Cycle Time is application dependent, in the range of 1ms
- 100ms for critical control/data streams. - 100ms for critical control/data streams.
Because industrial applications assume deterministic transport for Because industrial applications assume deterministic transport for
critical Control-Data-Stream parameters (instead of defining latency critical Control-Data-Stream parameters (instead of defining latency
and delay variation parameters) it is sufficient to fulfill the upper and delay variation parameters) it is sufficient to fulfill the upper
bound of latency (maximum latency). The underlying networking bound of latency (maximum latency). The underlying networking
infrastructure must ensure a maximum end-to-end delivery time of infrastructure must ensure a maximum end-to-end delivery time of
skipping to change at page 63, line 17 skipping to change at page 66, line 31
"down" by the Application. "down" by the Application.
As network downtime may impact the whole production system the As network downtime may impact the whole production system the
required network availability is rather high (99,999%). required network availability is rather high (99,999%).
Based on the above parameters we expect that some form of redundancy Based on the above parameters we expect that some form of redundancy
will be required for M2M communications, however any individual will be required for M2M communications, however any individual
solution depends on several parameters including cycle time, delivery solution depends on several parameters including cycle time, delivery
time, etc. time, etc.
7.2.2. Stream Creation and Destruction 8.2.2. Stream Creation and Destruction
In an industrial environment, critical control/data streams are In an industrial environment, critical control/data streams are
created rather infrequently, on the order of ~10 times per day / week created rather infrequently, on the order of ~10 times per day / week
/ month. Most of these critical control/data streams get created at / month. Most of these critical control/data streams get created at
machine startup, however flexibility is also needed during runtime, machine startup, however flexibility is also needed during runtime,
for example when adding or removing a machine. Going forward as for example when adding or removing a machine. Going forward as
production systems become more flexible, we expect a significant production systems become more flexible, we expect a significant
increase in the rate at which streams are created, changed and increase in the rate at which streams are created, changed and
destroyed. destroyed.
7.3. Industrial M2M Future 8.3. Industrial M2M Future
We would like to see the various proprietary networks replaced with a We would like to see the various proprietary networks replaced with a
converged IP-standards-based network with deterministic properties converged IP-standards-based network with deterministic properties
that can satisfy the timing, security and reliability constraints that can satisfy the timing, security and reliability constraints
described above. described above.
7.4. Industrial M2M Asks 8.4. Industrial M2M Asks
o Converged IP-based network o Converged IP-based network
o Deterministic behavior (bounded latency and jitter ) o Deterministic behavior (bounded latency and jitter )
o High availability (presumably through redundancy) (99.999 %) o High availability (presumably through redundancy) (99.999 %)
o Low message delivery time (100us - 50ms) o Low message delivery time (100us - 50ms)
o Low packet loss (burstless, 0.1-1 %) o Low packet loss (burstless, 0.1-1 %)
o Precise time synchronization accuracy (1us) o Precise time synchronization accuracy (1us)
o Security (e.g. prevent critical flows from being leaked between o Security (e.g. prevent critical flows from being leaked between
physically separated networks) physically separated networks)
8. Other Use Cases 9. Internet-based Applications
8.1. Introduction 9.1. Use Case Description
The rapid growth of the today's communication system and its access There are many applications that communicate across the open Internet
into almost all aspects of daily life has led to great dependency on that could benefit from guaranteed delivery and bounded latency. The
services it provides. The communication network, as it is today, has following are some representative examples.
applications such as multimedia and peer-to-peer file sharing
distribution that require Quality of Service (QoS) guarantees in
terms of delay and jitter to maintain a certain level of performance.
Meanwhile, mobile wireless communications has become an important
part to support modern sociality with increasing importance over the
last years. A communication network of hard real-time and high
reliability is essential for the next concurrent and next generation
mobile wireless networks as well as its bearer network for E-2-E
performance requirements.
Conventional transport network is IP-based because of the bandwidth 9.1.1. Media Content Delivery
and cost requirements. However the delay and jitter guarantee
becomes a challenge in case of contention since the service here is
not deterministic but best effort. With more and more rigid demand
in latency control in the future network [METIS], deterministic
networking [I-D.finn-detnet-architecture] is a promising solution to
meet the ultra low delay applications and use cases. There are
already typical issues for delay sensitive networking requirements in
midhaul and backhaul network to support LTE and future 5G network
[net5G]. And not only in the telecom industry but also other
vertical industry has increasing demand on delay sensitive
communications as the automation becomes critical recently.
More specifically, CoMP techniques, D-2-D, industrial automation and Media content delivery continues to be an important use of the
gaming/media service all have great dependency on the low delay Internet, yet users often experience poor quality audio and video due
communications as well as high reliability to guarantee the service to the delay and jitter inherent in today's Internet.
performance. Note that the deterministic networking is not equal to
low latency as it is more focused on the worst case delay bound of
the duration of certain application or service. It can be argued
that without high certainty and absolute delay guarantee, low delay
provisioning is just relative [rfc3393], which is not sufficient to
some delay critical service since delay violation in an instance
cannot be tolerated. Overall, the requirements from vertical
industries seem to be well aligned with the expected low latency and
high determinist performance of future networks
This document describes several use cases and scenarios with 9.1.2. Online Gaming
requirements on deterministic delay guarantee within the scope of the
deterministic network [I-D.finn-detnet-problem-statement].
8.2. Critical Delay Requirements Online gaming is a significant part of the gaming market, however
latency can degrade the end user experience. For example "First
Person Shooter" (FPS) games are highly delay-sensitive.
Delay and jitter requirement has been take into account as a major 9.1.3. Virtual Reality
component in QoS provisioning since the birth of Internet. The delay
sensitive networking with increasing importance become the root of
mobile wireless communications as well as the applicable areas which
are all greatly relied on low delay communications. Due to the best
effort feature of the IP networking, mitigate contention and
buffering is the main solution to serve the delay sensitive service.
More bandwidth is assigned to keep the link low loaded or in another
word, reduce the probability of congestion. However, not only lack
of determinist but also has limitation to serve the applications in
the future communication system, keeping low loaded cannot provide
deterministic delay guarantee. Take the [METIS] that documents the
fundamental challenges as well as overall technical goal of the 5G
mobile and wireless system as the starting point. It should
supports: -1000 times higher mobile data volume per area, -10 times
to 100 times higher typical user data rate, -10 times to 100 times
higher number of connected devices, -10 times longer battery life for
low power devices, and -5 times reduced End-to-End (E2E) latency, at
similar cost and energy consumption levels as today's system. Taking
part of these requirements related to latency, current LTE networking
system has E2E latency less than 20ms [LTE-Latency] which leads to
around 5ms E2E latency for 5G networks. It has been argued that
fulfill such rigid latency demand with similar cost will be most
challenging as the system also requires 100 times bandwidth as well
as 100 times of connected devices. As a result to that, simply
adding redundant bandwidth provisioning can be no longer an efficient
solution due to the high bandwidth requirements more than ever
before. In addition to the bandwidth provisioning, the critical flow
within its reserved resource should not be affected by other flows no
matter the pressure of the network. Robust defense of critical flow
is also not depended on redundant bandwidth allocation.
Deterministic networking techniques in both layer-2 and layer-3 using
IETF protocol solutions can be promising to serve these scenarios.
8.3. Coordinated multipoint processing (CoMP) Virtual reality (VR) has many commercial applications including real
estate presentations, remote medical procedures, and so on. Low
latency is critical to interacting with the virtual world because
perceptual delays can cause motion sickness.
In the wireless communication system, Coordinated multipoint 9.2. Internet-Based Applications Today
processing (CoMP) is considered as an effective technique to solve
the inter-cell interference problem to improve the cell-edge user
throughput [CoMP].
8.3.1. CoMP Architecture Internet service today is by definition "best effort", with no
+--------------------------+ guarantees on delivery or bandwidth.
| CoMP |
+--+--------------------+--+
| |
+----------+ +------------+
| Uplink | | Downlink |
+-----+----+ +--------+---+
| |
------------------- -----------------------
| | | | | |
+---------+ +----+ +-----+ +------------+ +-----+ +-----+
| Joint | | CS | | DPS | | Joint | | CS/ | | DPS |
|Reception| | | | | |Transmission| | CB | | |
+---------+ +----+ +-----+ +------------+ +-----+ +-----+
| |
|----------- |-------------
| | | |
+------------+ +---------+ +----------+ +------------+
| Joint | | Soft | | Coherent | | Non- |
|Equalization| |Combining| | JT | | Coherent JT|
+------------+ +---------+ +----------+ +------------+
Figure 11: Framework of CoMP Technology 9.3. Internet-Based Applications Future
As shown in Figure 11, CoMP reception and transmission is a framework We imagine an Internet from which we will be able to play a video
that multiple geographically distributed antenna nodes cooperate to without glitches and play games without lag.
improve the performance of the users served in the common cooperation
area. The design principal of CoMP is to extend the current single-
cell to multi-UEs transmission to a multi-cell- to-multi-UEs
transmission by base station cooperation. In contrast to single-cell
scenario, CoMP has critical issues such as: Backhaul latency, CSI
(Channel State Information) reporting and accuracy and Network
complexity. Clearly the first two requirements are very much delay
sensitive and will be discussed in next section.
8.3.2. Delay Sensitivity in CoMP For online gaming, the maximum round-trip delay can be 100ms and
stricter for FPS gaming which can be 10-50ms. Transport delay is the
dominate part with a 5-20ms budget.
As the essential feature of CoMP, signaling is exchanged between For VR, 1-10ms maximum delay is needed and total network budget is
eNBs, the backhaul latency is the dominating limitation of the CoMP 1-5ms if doing remote VR.
performance. Generally, JT and JP may benefit from coordinating the
scheduling (distributed or centralized) of different cells in case
that the signaling exchanging between eNBs is limited to 4-10ms. For
C-RAN the backhaul latency requirement is 250us while for D-RAN it is
4-15ms. And this delay requirement is not only rigid but also
absolute since any uncertainty in delay will down the performance
significantly. Note that, some operator's transport network is not
build to support Layer-3 transfer in aggregation layer. In such
case, the signaling is exchanged through EPC which means delay is
supposed to be larger. CoMP has high requirement on delay and
reliability which is lack by current mobile network systems and may
impact the architecture of the mobile network.
8.4. Industrial Automation Flow identification can be used for gaming and VR, i.e. it can
recognize a critical flow and provide appropriate latency bounds.
Traditional "industrial automation" terminology usually refers to 9.4. Internet-Based Applications Asks
automation of manufacturing, quality control and material processing.
"Industrial internet" and "industrial 4.0" [EA12] is becoming a hot
topic based on the Internet of Things. This high flexible and
dynamic engineering and manufacturing will result in a lot of so-
called smart approaches such as Smart Factory, Smart Products, Smart
Mobility, and Smart Home/Buildings. No doubt that ultra high
reliability and robustness is a must in data transmission, especially
in the closed loop automation control application where delay
requirement is below 1ms and packet loss less than 10E-9. All these
critical requirements on both latency and loss cannot be fulfilled by
current 4G communication networks. Moreover, the collaboration of
the industrial automation from remote campus with cellular and fixed
network has to be built on an integrated, cloud-based platform. In
this way, the deterministic flows should be guaranteed regardless of
the amount of other flows in the network. The lack of this mechanism
becomes the main obstacle in deployment on of industrial automation.
8.5. Vehicle to Vehicle o Unified control and management protocols to handle time-critical
data flow
V2V communication has gained more and more attention in the last few o Application-aware flow filtering mechanism to recognize the timing
years and will be increasingly growth in the future. Not only critical flow without doing 5-tuple matching
equipped with direct communication system which is short ranged, V2V
communication also requires wireless cellular networks to cover wide
range and more sophisticated services. V2V application in the area
autonomous driving has very stringent requirements of latency and
reliability. It is critical that the timely arrival of information
for safety issues. In addition, due to the limitation of processing
of individual vehicle, passing information to the cloud can provide
more functions such as video processing, audio recognition or
navigation systems. All of those requirements lead to a highly
reliable connectivity to the cloud. On the other hand, it is natural
that the provisioning of low latency communication is one of the main
challenges to be overcome as a result of the high mobility, the high
penetration losses caused by the vehicle itself. As result of that,
the data transmission with latency below 5ms and a high reliability
of PER below 10E-6 are demanded. It can benefit from the deployment
of deterministic networking with high reliability.
8.6. Gaming, Media and Virtual Reality o Unified control plane to provide low latency service on Layer-3
without changing the data plane
Online gaming and cloud gaming is dominating the gaming market since o OAM system and protocols which can help to provide E2E-delay
it allow multiple players to play together with more challenging and sensitive service provisioning
competing. Connected via current internet, the latency can be a big
issue to degrade the end users' experience. There different types of
games and FPS (First Person Shooting) gaming has been considered to
be the most latency sensitive online gaming due to the high
requirements of timing precision and computing of moving target.
Virtual reality is also receiving more interests than ever before as
a novel gaming experience. The delay here can be very critical to
the interacting in the virtual world. Disagreement between what is
seeing and what is feeling can cause motion sickness and affect what
happens in the game. Supporting fast, real-time and reliable
communications in both PHY/MAC layer, network layer and application
layer is main bottleneck for such use case. The media content
delivery has been and will become even more important use of
Internet. Not only high bandwidth demand but also critical delay and
jitter requirements have to be taken into account to meet the user
demand. To make the smoothness of the video and audio, delay and
jitter has to be guaranteed to avoid possible interruption which is
the killer of all online media on demand service. Now with 4K and 8K
video in the near future, the delay guarantee become one of the most
challenging issue than ever before. 4K/8K UHD video service requires
6Gbps-100Gbps for uncompressed video and compressed video starting
from 60Mbps. The delay requirement is 100ms while some specific
interactive applications may require 10ms delay [UHD-video].
9. Use Case Common Elements 10. Use Case Common Elements
Looking at the use cases collectively, the following common desires Looking at the use cases collectively, the following common desires
for the DetNet-based networks of the future emerge: for the DetNet-based networks of the future emerge:
o Open standards-based network (replace various proprietary o Open standards-based network (replace various proprietary
networks, reduce cost, create multi-vendor market) networks, reduce cost, create multi-vendor market)
o Centrally administered (though such administration may be o Centrally administered (though such administration may be
distributed for scale and resiliency) distributed for scale and resiliency)
skipping to change at page 69, line 30 skipping to change at page 69, line 35
loops may be less than 1ms, but larger for wide area networks) loops may be less than 1ms, but larger for wide area networks)
o High availability (99.9999 percent up time requested, but may be o High availability (99.9999 percent up time requested, but may be
up to twelve 9s) up to twelve 9s)
o Reliability, redundancy (lives at stake) o Reliability, redundancy (lives at stake)
o Security (from failures, attackers, misbehaving devices - o Security (from failures, attackers, misbehaving devices -
sensitive to both packet content and arrival time) sensitive to both packet content and arrival time)
10. Acknowledgments 11. Acknowledgments
10.1. Pro Audio 11.1. Pro Audio
This section was derived from draft-gunther-detnet-proaudio-req-01. This section was derived from draft-gunther-detnet-proaudio-req-01.
The editors would like to acknowledge the help of the following The editors would like to acknowledge the help of the following
individuals and the companies they represent: individuals and the companies they represent:
Jeff Koftinoff, Meyer Sound Jeff Koftinoff, Meyer Sound
Jouni Korhonen, Associate Technical Director, Broadcom Jouni Korhonen, Associate Technical Director, Broadcom
Pascal Thubert, CTAO, Cisco Pascal Thubert, CTAO, Cisco
Kieran Tyrrell, Sienda New Media Technologies GmbH Kieran Tyrrell, Sienda New Media Technologies GmbH
10.2. Utility Telecom 11.2. Utility Telecom
This section was derived from draft-wetterwald-detnet-utilities-reqs- This section was derived from draft-wetterwald-detnet-utilities-reqs-
02. 02.
Faramarz Maghsoodlou, Ph. D. IoT Connected Industries and Energy Faramarz Maghsoodlou, Ph. D. IoT Connected Industries and Energy
Practice Cisco Practice Cisco
Pascal Thubert, CTAO Cisco Pascal Thubert, CTAO Cisco
10.3. Building Automation Systems 11.3. Building Automation Systems
This section was derived from draft-bas-usecase-detnet-00. This section was derived from draft-bas-usecase-detnet-00.
10.4. Wireless for Industrial 11.4. Wireless for Industrial
This section was derived from draft-thubert-6tisch-4detnet-01. This section was derived from draft-thubert-6tisch-4detnet-01.
This specification derives from the 6TiSCH architecture, which is the This specification derives from the 6TiSCH architecture, which is the
result of multiple interactions, in particular during the 6TiSCH result of multiple interactions, in particular during the 6TiSCH
(bi)Weekly Interim call, relayed through the 6TiSCH mailing list at (bi)Weekly Interim call, relayed through the 6TiSCH mailing list at
the IETF. the IETF.
The authors wish to thank: Kris Pister, Thomas Watteyne, Xavier The authors wish to thank: Kris Pister, Thomas Watteyne, Xavier
Vilajosana, Qin Wang, Tom Phinney, Robert Assimiti, Michael Vilajosana, Qin Wang, Tom Phinney, Robert Assimiti, Michael
Richardson, Zhuo Chen, Malisa Vucinic, Alfredo Grieco, Martin Turon, Richardson, Zhuo Chen, Malisa Vucinic, Alfredo Grieco, Martin Turon,
Dominique Barthel, Elvis Vogli, Guillaume Gaillard, Herman Storey, Dominique Barthel, Elvis Vogli, Guillaume Gaillard, Herman Storey,
Maria Rita Palattella, Nicola Accettura, Patrick Wetterwald, Pouria Maria Rita Palattella, Nicola Accettura, Patrick Wetterwald, Pouria
Zand, Raghuram Sudhaakar, and Shitanshu Shah for their participation Zand, Raghuram Sudhaakar, and Shitanshu Shah for their participation
and various contributions. and various contributions.
10.5. Cellular Radio 11.5. Cellular Radio
This section was derived from draft-korhonen-detnet-telreq-00. This section was derived from draft-korhonen-detnet-telreq-00.
10.6. Industrial M2M 11.6. Industrial M2M
The authors would like to thank Feng Chen and Marcel Kiessling for The authors would like to thank Feng Chen and Marcel Kiessling for
their comments and suggestions. their comments and suggestions.
10.7. Other 11.7. Other
This section was derived from draft-zha-detnet-use-case-00. This section was derived from draft-zha-detnet-use-case-00.
This document has benefited from reviews, suggestions, comments and This document has benefited from reviews, suggestions, comments and
proposed text provided by the following members, listed in proposed text provided by the following members, listed in
alphabetical order: Jing Huang, Junru Lin, Lehong Niu and Oilver alphabetical order: Jing Huang, Junru Lin, Lehong Niu and Oilver
Huang. Huang.
11. Informative References 12. Informative References
[ACE] IETF, "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained [ACE] IETF, "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained
Environments", <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter- Environments", <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-
ietf-ace/>. ietf-ace/>.
[bacnetip] [bacnetip]
ASHRAE, "Annex J to ANSI/ASHRAE 135-1995 - BACnet/IP", ASHRAE, "Annex J to ANSI/ASHRAE 135-1995 - BACnet/IP",
January 1999. January 1999.
[CCAMP] IETF, "Common Control and Measurement Plane", [CCAMP] IETF, "Common Control and Measurement Plane",
 End of changes. 49 change blocks. 
240 lines changed or deleted 251 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/