Re: [802.3_EPOC] Evaluation Criteria and Requirements Ad Hoc - Minutes October 11, 2012
Matt,
If we can do so without respect to higher layer activites (QoS) that would
be fine. That is to say "maximum latency through the system" when scheduled
for rtps like service shall be "X" through the system and then with a reach
budget (distance) one could calculate the total latency. To keep the
exercise useful, I would think it would have to be CLT to CNU only because
the EPON component can have it's own (think ER for example) delay from OLT
to the CLT.
Make sense ?
-Victor
From: Matthew Schmitt [mailto:m.schmitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 12:03 PM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Evaluation Criteria and Requirements Ad Hoc -
Minutes October 11, 2012
Marek,
While MEF 23.1 addresses the whole system - and therefore, I agree, does go
beyond what we can control within the scope of 802.3bn - I'm wondering if we
might be able to make some reasonable assumptions about other parts of the
network, and from that derive an upper bound for things such as latency as
to what would be acceptable in EPoC? I'd appreciate your thoughts.
Thanks.
Matt
From: Marek Hajduczenia <marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx>
Reply-To: Marek Hajduczenia <marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx>
Date: Friday, October 12, 2012 8:52 AM
To: "STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Evaluation Criteria and Requirements Ad Hoc -
Minutes October 11, 2012
Steve,
Thank you for the minutes.
Before we get creatively into lengthy discussions on what services are
supported and what requirements we put forward for them, I would like to
remind everybody the scope of the Task Force we are part of. We do not deal
with service layer, service definitions (apart from services provided by
individual layers), so specifications such as MEF 23.1 are meaningless to
us. Such documents do not provide budget for the access part of the network,
let alone for OLT or ONU. It is not our scope to decide how much of MEF 23.1
budget can be burnt in EPoC portion of the network, and how it is
distributed between OLT and ONU. What we can do is take every reasonably
justified effort to minimize delay in EPoC. This is what I believe is a
better use of our time, rather than contemplation of MEF specs, which are
service oriented.
In regards to the problem of synchronization, I would suggest that we focus
on adding support to 802.3bf-2011 functions in P802.3bn specification
(should be very straighforward). Having gone through that project and
participated in Q13 and 802.1AS discussions, with high level of confidence I
can say that everything one needs to implement any type of synchronization
client over EPoC is already covered in 802.3bf. As for specific selection of
the synchronization mechanism operating on top of EPoC layers, I'd suggest
to focus on DPoE solution, especially that there is apparent interest in
aligning DPoE and EPoC for common management. Having two solutions would be
at best questionable in terms of development effort. However, decision on
this topic is outside the scope of P802.3bn Task Force (such mechanisms
operate in HIGHER LAYERS shown below).
Regards
Marek
From: Shellhammer, Steve [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 21:08
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.3_EPOC] Evaluation Criteria and Requirements Ad Hoc - Minutes
October 11, 2012
Here are the minutes from this morning's call.
Steve
_____
_____
<="" p="">
_____
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1
