Skip to main content

Simplemux Blast flavor
draft-saldana-tsvwg-simplemux-blast-00

Document Type Expired Internet-Draft (individual)
Expired & archived
Author Jose Saldana
Last updated 2024-07-05 (Latest revision 2024-01-02)
RFC stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state Expired
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:

Abstract

Many utilities are nowadays connected via dedicated networks, but the trend toward a fully IP network is gaining more traction in some sectors (e.g. electric power). In some use cases, although it would be desirable to avoid the use of IP networks, this may prove unavoidable. Consequently, equipment is linked to extensive communication networks, the performance of which cannot be fully controlled or known. Some utilities that are not connected to a dedicated network may use public wireless networks, which present certain degree of variability of some parameters (delay, jitter, packet loss, and bandwidth limits). Considering the importance of receiving packets with a low delay, this document presents a solution for using tunnels to send frames or packets between remote facilities, with a certain degree of redundance. This can be useful in some use cases as e.g. the sending of event-driven field commands between eletric substations. In some cases, these messages can be very critical, and their loss or delay can make the difference between a blackout and a simple outage. Considering the high redundancy of the protocol, its use must be restricted to traffic flows which require very low delay to control critical equipment.

Authors

Jose Saldana

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)