Subject: Re: [ntpwg] [TICTOC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-03.txt

From: Tal Mizrahi <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:47:01 +0200

Hi Shahram et al.

What is the motivation for adding NTP to this draft?
Are we planning to define something similar to a correctionField in NTP?

Regards,
Tal.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 10:28 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [TICTOC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-03.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Timing over IP Connection and Transfer of Clock Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Transporting Timing messages over MPLS Networks
	Author(s)       : Shahram Davari
                          Amit Oren
                          Manav Bhatia
                          Peter Roberts
                          Laurent Montini
	Filename        : draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-03.txt
	Pages           : 36
	Date            : 2012-10-22

Abstract:
   This document defines the method for transporting Timing messages
   such as PTP and NTP over an MPLS network.  The method allows for the
   easy identification of these PDUs at the port level to allow for port
   level processing of these PDUs in both LERs and LSRs.

   The basic idea is to transport Timing messages inside dedicated MPLS
   LSPs.  These LSPs only carry timing messages and possibly Control and
   Management packets, but they do not carry customer traffic.

   Two methods for transporting Timing messages over MPLS are defined.
   The first method is to transport Timing messages directly over the
   dedicated MPLS LSP via UDP/IP encapsulation, which is suitable for
   MPLS networks.  The second method is to transport Timing messages
   inside a PW via Ethernet encapsulation, which is suitable for both
   MPLS and MPLS-TP networks.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-03

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-03

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
TICTOC mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc
_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg

---

From: Tal Mizrahi <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 22:35:28 +0200

Hi Shahram,

Thanks for the prompt response.
I would suggest to add some text to explain the scope of this draft in the context of NTP, i.e., your explanation below.

A question to the WG chairs: if NTP TCs are indeed on the agenda, wouldn't it be best to define these entities in parallel to the MPLS draft? It seems more natural, and more likely to produce a coherent mechanism.

Thanks,
Tal.

________________________________________
From: Shahram Davari [[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 6:46 PM
To: Tal Mizrahi; [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [TICTOC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-03.txt

Hi Tal,

If you recall the Area director asked for generalizing this draft to NTP and other possible future Timing methods such as a Shim header that can carry Timing. I know NTP does not have TC, but IETF may add TC in future. Also on the egress LER the timing Label (defined in the draft) may be used as an indicator to sample ToD at the port level.

Thanks
Shahram

-----Original Message-----
From: Tal Mizrahi [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 7:47 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [TICTOC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-03.txt

Hi Shahram et al.

Regards,
Tal.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 10:28 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [TICTOC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-03.txt

Abstract:

---

From: Karen O'Donoghue <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:10:41 -0400

Tal,

It is true that developing an NTP option in parallel would potentially 
be more efficient and coherent; however, we have thus far had no 
volunteers to work on that document. The current approach is flexible 
enough to support PTP, NTP, and possibly other timing methods which is a 
generalization of the solution originally proposed.

We welcome proposals and volunteer document editors who wish to pursue 
the NTP option.

Regards,
Karen