Deterministic Networking Problem Statement
draft-finn-detnet-problem-statement-03
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Replaced".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Norman Finn , Pascal Thubert | ||
| Last updated | 2015-06-11 | ||
| Replaced by | draft-ietf-detnet-problem-statement, RFC 8557 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-finn-detnet-problem-statement-03
detnet N. Finn
Internet-Draft P. Thubert
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco
Expires: December 13, 2015 June 11, 2015
Deterministic Networking Problem Statement
draft-finn-detnet-problem-statement-03
Abstract
This paper documents the needs in various industries to establish
multi-hop paths for characterized flows with deterministic properties
.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 13, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on 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.
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. On Deterministic Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Related IETF work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Deterministic PHB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. 6TiSCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Related work in other standards organizations . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. Bridged solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. Queuing and shaping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1. DetNet architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.2. Flow Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.3. Centralized Path Computation and Installation . . . . . . 11
6.4. Distributed Path Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.5. Duplicated data format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction
Operational Technology (OT) refers to industrial networks that are
specifically deployed in order to monitor production systems and
support control loops and movement detection operations for process
control (i.e., continuous manufacturing) and factory automation
(i.e., discrete manufacturing), as well as protection systems used in
power distribution automation (the SmartGrid). Due to its different
goals, OT has evolved in parallel but in a manner that is radically
different from Information Technology/Information and Communications
Technology (IT/ICT), focusing on highly secure, reliable and
deterministic networks, with limited scalability over a bounded and
closed area.
In OT environments, deterministic networks are characterized as
providing a guaranteed bandwidth with extremely low packet loss
rates, bounded latency, and low jitter.
The convergence of IT and OT technologies, also called the Industrial
Internet, represents a major evolution for both sides. For IT, it
means a new level of Quality of Service whereby the transfer of
packets is completely controlled and repeatable, different flows are
perfectly isolated from one another, and packet loss and system
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
downtimes are reduced drastically; for OT, it means sharing IT
resources between deterministic and stochastic flows in order to
retrieve vasts amounts of so-far unmeasured data and enable
additional optimizations.
The work has already started; in particular, the industrial
automation space has been developing a number of Ethernet-based
replacements for existing digital control systems (DCS), often not
packet-based (fieldbus technologies). These replacements are meant
to provide similar behavior as the incumbent protocols, and their
common focus is to transport a fully characterized flow over a well-
controlled environment (i.e., a factory floor), with a bounded
latency, extraordinarily low frame loss, and a very narrow jitter.
Examples of such protocols include PROFINET, ODVA Ethernet/IP, and
EtherCAT.
As an example, Industrial Automation segregates the network along the
broad lines of the Purdue Enterprise Reference Architecture (PERA),
using different technologies at each level, and public
infrastructures such as the power distribution grid require
deterministic properties over the Wide Area. To fully serve an
industrial application between a wireless sensor and a virtualized
control system operating from the carpeted floor, a deterministic
path may span, for instance, across a (limited) number of 802.1
bridges and then a (limited) number of IP routers. In that example,
the IEEE802.1 bridges may be operating at Layer-2 over Ethernet
whereas the IP routers may be 6TiSCH [TiSCH] nodes operating at
Layer-2 and/or Layer-3 over the IEEE802.15.4 MAC.
In parallel, the need for determinism in professional and home audio/
video markets drove the formation of the Audio/Video Bridging (AVB)
standards efforts in IEEE 802.1. With the demand for connectivity
and multimedia in transportation, AVB is being evaluated for
application in vehicle head units, rear seat entertainment modules,
amplifiers, camera modules, and engine control systems. Automotive
AVB networks share the OT requirements for deterministic networks
characteristics.
Other instances of in-vehicle deterministic networks have arisen as
well for control networks in cars, trains and buses, as well as
avionics, with, for instance, the mission-critical "Avionics Full-
Duplex Switched Ethernet" (AFDX) that was designed as part of the
ARINC 664 standards. Existing automotive control networks such as
the LIN, CAN and FlexRay standards were not designed to cover the
increasing demands in terms of bandwidth and scalability that we see
with various kinds of Driver Assistance Systems (DAS); it results
that new multiplexing technologies based on Ethernet are now getting
traction.
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
Other industries where strong needs for deterministic networks are
now emerging include: radio access networks
[I-D.korhonen-detnet-telreq], the SmartGrid
[I-D.wetterwald-detnet-utilities-reqs], and ProAudio networks
[I-D.gunther-detnet-proaudio-req].
This wider application scope for deterministic networks has led to
the IEEE802.1 AVB Task Group becoming the Time-Sensitive Networking
(TSN) Task Group (TG) [IEEE802.1TSNTG], additionally covering
industrial and vehicular applications.
The networks in consideration are now extending beyond the LAN
boundaries and require secure deterministic forwarding and
connectivity over a mixed Layer-2/Layer-3 network. The properties of
deterministic networks will have specific requirements for the use of
routed networks to support these applications and a new model must be
proposed to integrate determinism in IT technology.
The proposed model should enable a fully scheduled operation
orchestrated by a central controller, and may support a more
distributed operation with probably lesser capabilities. In any
fashion, the model should not compromise the ability of a network to
keep carrying the sorts of traffic that is already carried today in
conjunction with new, more deterministic flows.
Once the abstract model is agreed upon, the IETF will need to specify
the signaling elements to be used to establish a path and the tagging
elements to be used identify the flows that are to be forwarded along
that path. The IETF will also need to specify the necessary
protocols, or protocol additions, based on relevant IETF technologies
such as PCE [PCE], TEAS [TEAS], CCAMP [CCAMP] and MPLS [MPLS], to
implement the selected model.
As a result of this work, it will be possible to establish a multi-
hop path over the IP network, for a particular flow with given timing
and precise throughput requirements, and carry this particular flow
along the multi-hop path with such characteristics as low latency and
ultra-low jitter, duplication and elimination of packets over non-
congruent paths for a higher delivery ratio, and/or zero congestion
loss, regardless of the amount of other flows in the network.
Depending on the network capabilities and on the current state,
requests to establish a path by an end-node or a network management
entity may be granted or rejected, an existing path may be moved or
removed, and flows exceeding their contract may face packet
declassification and drop.
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. On Deterministic Networking
The Internet is not the only digital network that has grown
dramatically over the last 30-40 years. Video and audio
entertainment, and control systems for machinery, manufacturing
processes, and vehicles are also ubiquitous, and are now based almost
entirely on digital technologies. Over the past 10 years, engineers
in these fields have come to realize that significant advantages in
both cost and in the ability to accelerate growth can be obtained by
basing all of these disparate digital technologies on packet
networks.
The goals of Deterministic Networking are to enable the migration of
applications that use special-purpose fieldbus technologies (HDMI,
CANbus, ProfiBus, etc... even RS-232!) to packet technologies in
general, and the Internet Protocol in particular, and to support both
these new applications, and existing packet network applications,
over the same physical network.
Considerable experience ([ODVA],[AVnu], [Profinet],[HSR-PRP], etc...)
has shown that these applications need a some or all of a suite of
features that includes:
1. Time synchronization of all host and network nodes (routers and/
or bridges), accurate to something between 10 nanoseconds and 10
microseconds, depending on the application.
2. Support for critical packet flows that:
* Can be unicast or multicast;
* Need absolute guarantees of minimum and maximum latency end-
to-end across the network; sometimes a tight jitter is
required as well;
* Need a packet loss ratio beyond the classical range for a
particular medium, in the range of 1.0e-9 to 1.0e-12, or
better, on Ethernet, and in the order of 1.0e-5 in Wireless
Sensor mesh Networks;
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
* Can, in total, absorb more than half of the network's
available bandwidth (that is, massive over-provisioning is
ruled out as a solution);
* Cannot suffer throttling, congestion feedback, or any other
network-imposed transmission delay, although the flows can be
meaningfully characterized either by a fixed, repeating
transmission schedule, or by a maximum bandwidth and packet
size;
3. Multiple methods to schedule, shape, limit, and otherwise control
the transmission of critical packets at each hop through the
network data plane;
4. Robust defenses against misbehaving hosts, routers, or bridges,
both in the data and control planes, with guarantees that a
critical flow within its guaranteed resources cannot be affected
by other flows whatever the pressures on the network;
5. One or more methods to reserve resources in bridges and routers
to carry these flows.
Time synchronization techniques need not be addressed by an IETF
Working Group; there are a number of standards available for this
purpose, including IEEE 1588, IEEE 802.1AS, and more.
The multicast, latency, loss ratio, and non-throttling needs are made
necessary by the algorithms employed by the applications. They are
not simply the transliteration of fieldbus needs to a packet-based
fieldbus simulation, but reflect fundamental mathematics of the
control of a physical system.
With classical forwarding latency- and loss-sensitive packets across
a network, interactions among different critical flows introduce
fundamental uncertainties in delivery schedules. The details of the
queuing, shaping, and scheduling algorithms employed by each bridge
or router to control the output sequence on a given port affect the
detailed makeup of the output stream, e.g. how finely a given flow's
packets are mixed among those of other flows.
This, in turn, has a strong effect on the buffer requirements, and
hence the latency guarantees deliverable, by the next bridge or
router along the path. For this reason, the IEEE 802.1 Time-
Sensitive Networking Task Group has defined a new set of queuing,
shaping, and scheduling algorithms (see Section 5.2) that enable each
bridge or router to compute the exact number of buffers to be
allocated for each flow or class of flows. The present authors
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
assume that these techniques will be used by the DetNet Working
Group.
Robustness is a common need for networking protocols, but plays a
more important part in real-time control networks, where expensive
equipment, and even lives, can be lost due to misbehaving equipment.
Reserving resources before packet transmission is the one fundamental
shift in the behavior of network applications that is impossible to
avoid. In the first place, a network cannot deliver finite latency
and practically zero packet loss to an arbitrarily high offered load.
Secondly, achieving practically zero packet loss for un-throttled
(though bandwidth limited) flows means that bridges and routers have
to dedicate buffer resources to specific flows or to classes of
flows. The requirements of each reservation have to be translated
into the parameters that control each host's, bridge's, and router's
queuing, shaping, and scheduling functions and delivered to the
hosts, bridges, and routers.
4. Related IETF work
4.1. Deterministic PHB
[I-D.svshah-tsvwg-deterministic-forwarding] defines a Differentiated
Services Per-Hop-Behavior (PHB) Group called Deterministic Forwarding
(DF). The document describes the purpose and semantics of this PHB.
It also describes creation and forwarding treatment of the service
class, and how the code-point can be mapped into one of the
aggregated Diffserv service classes [RFC5127].
4.2. 6TiSCH
Industrial process control already leverages deterministic wireless
Low power and Lossy Networks (LLNs) to interconnect critical
resource-constrained devices and form wireless mesh networks, with
standards such as [ISA100.11a] and [WirelessHART].
These standards rely on variations of the [IEEE802154] timeSlotted
Channel Hopping (TSCH) [RFC7554] Medium Access Control (MAC), and a
form of centralized Path Computation Element (PCE), to deliver
deterministic capabilities.
The TSCH MAC benefits include high reliability against interference,
low power consumption on characterized flows, and Traffic Engineering
capabilities. Typical applications are open and closed control
loops, as well as supervisory control flows and management.
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
The 6TiSCH Working Group focuses only on the TSCH mode of the
IEEE802.15.4e standard. The WG currently defines a framework for
managing the TSCH schedule. Future work will standardize
deterministic operations over so-called tracks as described in
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture]. Tracks are an instance of a
deterministic path, and the DetNet work is a prerequisite to specify
track operations and serve process control applications. The
dependencies that 6TiSCH has on PCE and DetNet work are further
discussed in [I-D.thubert-6tisch-4detnet].
[RFC5673] and [I-D.ietf-roll-rpl-industrial-applicability] section
2.1.3 and next discuss application-layer paradigms, such as Source-
sink (SS) that is a Multipeer to Multipeer (MP2MP) model that is
primarily used for alarms and alerts, Publish-subscribe (PS, or pub/
sub) that is typically used for sensor data, as well as Peer-to-peer
(P2P) and Peer-to-multipeer (P2MP) communications. Additional
considerations on Duocast and its N-cast generalization are also
provided for improved reliability.
5. Related work in other standards organizations
5.1. Bridged solutions
Completed and ongoing work in other standards bodies have, to date,
produced viable solutions, suitable for carrying IP traffic for a
subset of the applications of interest to DetNet, but only over
bridged networks, not through routers. Among these are:
o IEEE 802 Audio-Video Bridging [IEEE802.1BA-2011].
o IEEE 802 Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) Task Group (TG)
[IEEE802.1TSNTG]
o ISO/IEC HSR and PRP [HSR-PRP].
5.2. Queuing and shaping
A number of standards are completed or in progress in the IEEE 802.1
(bridging) and IEEE 802.3 (Ethernet) Working Groups related to the
queuing and transmission of Ethernet frames. Most of these standards
could be applied to non-Ethernet or non-802 media with equal
facility, and so will likely be of use to DetNet. See the DetNet
architecture draft [I-D.finn-detnet-architecture] for a detailed
list.
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
6. Problem Statement
6.1. DetNet architecture
An architecture that defines the space in which the various parts of
the DetNet solution operate is required. A start has been made with
[I-D.finn-detnet-architecture]. The main consideration is to build
on art that is deployed in existing OT networks.
These networks are systematically designed around a central
controller that has a God's view on the devices, their capabilities,
and their links to neighbors. The controller gets requests to
establish flows with certain Traffic Specifications, and programs the
necessary resources in the network to support those flows.
This design, referred to as Software Defined Networking (SDN),
simplifies the computation and the setup of paths, and ensures a
better view and an easier control of the network by an operator. To
inherit from this art, it has been determined early in DetNet
discussions that the work would initially focus on an SDN model as
well.
DetNet should thus produce the complete SDN architecture with
describes at a high level the interaction and data models to:
o report the topology and device capabilities to the central
controller;
o request a path setup for a new flow with particular
characteristics over the service interface and control it through
its life cycle;
o signal the new path to the devices, modify it to cope with various
events such as loss of a link, update it and tear it down;
o expose the status of the path to the end devices (UNI interface)
o provide additional reliability through redundancy, in particular
with packet replication and elimination;
o indicate the flows and packet sequences in-band with the flows;
The related concepts are already laid out at the IETF with [RFC7426],
which introduces the following elements:
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
SDN Layers and Architecture Terminology per RFC 7426
o--------------------------------o
| |
| +-------------+ +----------+ |
| | Application | | Service | |
| +-------------+ +----------+ |
| Application Plane |
o---------------Y----------------o
|
*-----------------------------Y---------------------------------*
| Network Services Abstraction Layer (NSAL) |
*------Y------------------------------------------------Y-------*
| |
| Service Interface |
| |
o------Y------------------o o---------------------Y------o
| | Control Plane | | Management Plane | |
| +----Y----+ +-----+ | | +-----+ +----Y----+ |
| | Service | | App | | | | App | | Service | |
| +----Y----+ +--Y--+ | | +--Y--+ +----Y----+ |
| | | | | | | |
| *----Y-----------Y----* | | *---Y---------------Y----* |
| | Control Abstraction | | | | Management Abstraction | |
| | Layer (CAL) | | | | Layer (MAL) | |
| *----------Y----------* | | *----------Y-------------* |
| | | | | |
o------------|------------o o------------|---------------o
| |
| CP | MP
| Southbound | Southbound
| Interface | Interface
| |
*------------Y---------------------------------Y----------------*
| Device and resource Abstraction Layer (DAL) |
*------------Y---------------------------------Y----------------*
| | | |
| o-------Y----------o +-----+ o--------Y----------o |
| | Forwarding Plane | | App | | Operational Plane | |
| o------------------o +-----+ o-------------------o |
| Network Device |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 1
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
6.2. Flow Characterization
Deterministic forwarding can only apply on flows with well-defined
characteristics such as periodicity and burstiness. Before a path
can be established to serve them, the expression of those
characteristics, and how the network can serve them, for instance in
shaping and forwarding operations, must be specified.
6.3. Centralized Path Computation and Installation
A centralized routing model, such as provided with a PCE, enables
global and per-flow optimizations. The model is attractive but a
number of issues are left to be solved. In particular:
o whether and how the path computation can be installed by 1) an end
device or 2) a Network Management entity,
o and how the path is set up, either by installing state at each hop
with a direct interaction between the forwarding device and the
PCE, or along a path by injecting a source-routed request at one
end of the path following classical Traffic Engineering (TE)
models.
6.4. Distributed Path Setup
Whether a distributed alternative without a PCE can be valuable could
be studied as well. Such an alternative could for instance inherit
from the Resource ReSerVation Protocol [RFC5127] (RSVP) flows. But
the focus of the work should be to deliver the centralized approach
first.
6.5. Duplicated data format
In some cases the duplication and elimination of packets over non-
congruent paths is required to achieve a sufficiently high delivery
ratio to meet application needs. In these cases, a small number of
packet formats and supporting protocols are required (preferably,
just one) to serialize the packets of a DetNet stream at one point in
the network, replicate them at one or more points in the network, and
discard duplicates at one or more other points in the network,
including perhaps the destination host. Using an existing solution
would be preferable to inventing a new one.
7. Security Considerations
Security in the context of Deterministic Networking has an added
dimension; the time of delivery of a packet can be just as important
as the contents of the packet, itself. A man-in-the-middle attack,
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
for example, can impose, and then systematically adjust, additional
delays into a link, and thus disrupt or subvert a real-time
application without having to crack any encryption methods employed.
See [RFC7384] for an exploration of this issue in a related context.
Typical control networks today rely on complete physical isolation to
prevent rogue access to network resources. DetNet enables the
virtualization of those networks over a converged IT/OT
infrastructure. Doing so, DetNet introduces an additional risk that
flows interact and interfere with one another as they share physical
resources such as Ethernet trunks and radio spectrum. The
requirement is that there is no possible data leak from and into a
deterministic flow, and in a more general fashion there is no
possible influence whatsoever from the outside on a deterministic
flow. The expectation is that physical resources are effectively
associated with a given flow at a given point if time. In that
model, Time Sharing of physical resources becomes transparent to the
individual flows which have no clue whether the resources are used by
other flows at other times.
Security must cover:
o the protection of the signaling protocol
o the authentication and authorization of the controlling nodes
o the identification and shaping of the flows
o the isolation of flows from leakage and other influences from any
activity sharing physical resources.
8. IANA Considerations
This document does not require an action from IANA.
9. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Jouni Korhonen, Erik Nordmark, George
Swallow, Rudy Klecka, Anca Zamfir, David Black, Thomas Watteyne,
Shitanshu Shah, Craig Gunther, Rodney Cummings, Wilfried Steiner,
Marcel Kiessling, Karl Weber, Ethan Grossman and Pat Thaler, for
their various contribution with this work.
10. References
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
10.1. Normative References
[I-D.gunther-detnet-proaudio-req]
Gunther, C. and E. Grossman, "Deterministic Networking
Professional Audio Requirements", draft-gunther-detnet-
proaudio-req-01 (work in progress), March 2015.
[I-D.korhonen-detnet-telreq]
Korhonen, J., "Deterministic networking for radio access
networks", draft-korhonen-detnet-telreq-00 (work in
progress), May 2015.
[I-D.thubert-6tisch-4detnet]
Thubert, P., "6TiSCH requirements for DetNet", draft-
thubert-6tisch-4detnet-00 (work in progress), June 2015.
[I-D.wetterwald-detnet-utilities-reqs]
Wetterwald, P. and J. Raymond, "Deterministic Networking
Uitilities requirements", draft-wetterwald-detnet-
utilities-reqs-01 (work in progress), October 2014.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
10.2. Informative References
[AVnu] http://www.avnu.org/, "The AVnu Alliance tests and
certifies devices for interoperability, providing a simple
and reliable networking solution for AV network
implementation based on the IEEE Audio Video Bridging
(AVB) and Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) standards.".
[CCAMP] IETF, "Common Control and Measurement Plane",
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-ccamp/>.
[HART] www.hartcomm.org, "Highway Addressable Remote Transducer,
a group of specifications for industrial process and
control devices administered by the HART Foundation".
[HSR-PRP] IEC, "High availability seamless redundancy (HSR) is a
further development of the PRP approach, although HSR
functions primarily as a protocol for creating media
redundancy while PRP, as described in the previous
section, creates network redundancy. PRP and HSR are both
described in the IEC 62439 3 standard.".
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
[I-D.finn-detnet-architecture]
Finn, N., Thubert, P., and M. Teener, "Deterministic
Networking Architecture", draft-finn-detnet-
architecture-01 (work in progress), March 2015.
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture]
Thubert, P., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the TSCH mode
of IEEE 802.15.4", draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-08 (work
in progress), May 2015.
[I-D.ietf-roll-rpl-industrial-applicability]
Phinney, T., Thubert, P., and R. Assimiti, "RPL
applicability in industrial networks", draft-ietf-roll-
rpl-industrial-applicability-02 (work in progress),
October 2013.
[I-D.svshah-tsvwg-deterministic-forwarding]
Shah, S. and P. Thubert, "Deterministic Forwarding PHB",
draft-svshah-tsvwg-deterministic-forwarding-03 (work in
progress), March 2015.
[IEEE802.1AS-2011]
IEEE, "Timing and Synchronizations (IEEE 802.1AS-2011)",
2011, <http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/
download/802.1AS-2011.pdf>.
[IEEE802.1BA-2011]
IEEE, "AVB Systems (IEEE 802.1BA-2011)", 2011,
<http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/
download/802.1BA-2011.pdf>.
[IEEE802.1Q-2011]
IEEE, "MAC Bridges and VLANs (IEEE 802.1Q-2011", 2011,
<http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/
download/802.1Q-2011.pdf>.
[IEEE802.1Qat-2010]
IEEE, "Stream Reservation Protocol (IEEE 802.1Qat-2010)",
2010, <http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/
download/802.1Qat-2010.pdf>.
[IEEE802.1Qav]
IEEE, "Forwarding and Queuing (IEEE 802.1Qav-2009)", 2009,
<http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/
download/802.1Qav-2009.pdf>.
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
[IEEE802.1TSNTG]
IEEE Standards Association, "IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive
Networks Task Group", 2013,
<http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/avbridges.html>.
[IEEE802154]
IEEE standard for Information Technology, "IEEE std.
802.15.4, Part. 15.4: Wireless Medium Access Control (MAC)
and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications for Low-Rate
Wireless Personal Area Networks".
[IEEE802154e]
IEEE standard for Information Technology, "IEEE std.
802.15.4e, Part. 15.4: Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area
Networks (LR-WPANs) Amendment 1: MAC sublayer", April
2012.
[ISA100.11a]
ISA/IEC, "ISA100.11a, Wireless Systems for Automation,
also IEC 62734", 2011, < http://www.isa100wci.org/en-
US/Documents/PDF/3405-ISA100-WirelessSystems-Future-broch-
WEB-ETSI.aspx>.
[MPLS] IETF, "Multiprotocol Label Switching",
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-mpls/>.
[ODVA] http://www.odva.org/, "The organization that supports
network technologies built on the Common Industrial
Protocol (CIP) including EtherNet/IP.".
[PCE] IETF, "Path Computation Element",
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-pce/>.
[Profinet]
http://us.profinet.com/technology/profinet/, "PROFINET is
a standard for industrial networking in automation.",
<http://us.profinet.com/technology/profinet/>.
[RFC2205] Braden, B., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.
Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1
Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997.
[RFC5127] Chan, K., Babiarz, J., and F. Baker, "Aggregation of
Diffserv Service Classes", RFC 5127, February 2008.
[RFC5673] Pister, K., Thubert, P., Dwars, S., and T. Phinney,
"Industrial Routing Requirements in Low-Power and Lossy
Networks", RFC 5673, October 2009.
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Deterministic Networking Problem Statement June 2015
[RFC7384] Mizrahi, T., "Security Requirements of Time Protocols in
Packet Switched Networks", RFC 7384, October 2014.
[RFC7426] Haleplidis, E., Pentikousis, K., Denazis, S., Hadi Salim,
J., Meyer, D., and O. Koufopavlou, "Software-Defined
Networking (SDN): Layers and Architecture Terminology",
RFC 7426, January 2015.
[RFC7554] Watteyne, T., Palattella, M., and L. Grieco, "Using IEEE
802.15.4e Time-Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) in the
Internet of Things (IoT): Problem Statement", RFC 7554,
May 2015.
[TEAS] IETF, "Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling",
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-teas/>.
[TiSCH] IETF, "IPv6 over the TSCH mode over 802.15.4",
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-6tisch/>.
[WirelessHART]
www.hartcomm.org, "Industrial Communication Networks -
Wireless Communication Network and Communication Profiles
- WirelessHART - IEC 62591", 2010.
Authors' Addresses
Norm Finn
Cisco Systems
510 McCarthy Blvd
SJ-24
Milpitas, California 95035
USA
Phone: +1 408 526 4495
Email: nfinn@cisco.com
Pascal Thubert
Cisco Systems
Village d'Entreprises Green Side
400, Avenue de Roumanille
Batiment T3
Biot - Sophia Antipolis 06410
FRANCE
Phone: +33 4 97 23 26 34
Email: pthubert@cisco.com
Finn & Thubert Expires December 13, 2015 [Page 16]