Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-detnet-tsn-vpn-over-mpls
draft-ietf-detnet-tsn-vpn-over-mpls
DetNet B. Varga, Ed.
Internet-Draft J. Farkas
Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson
Expires: August 23, 2021 A. Malis
Malis Consulting
S. Bryant
Futurewei Technologies
D. Fedyk
LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
February 19, 2021
DetNet Data Plane: IEEE 802.1 Time Sensitive Networking over MPLS
draft-ietf-detnet-tsn-vpn-over-mpls-07
Abstract
This document specifies the Deterministic Networking data plane when
TSN networks are interconnected over a DetNet MPLS Network.
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 https://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 August 23, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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
(https://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
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Terms Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. IEEE 802.1 TSN Over DetNet MPLS Data Plane Scenario . . . . . 4
4. DetNet MPLS Data Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. TSN over DetNet MPLS Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. TSN over MPLS Data Plane Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. Edge Node TSN Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. Edge Node DetNet Service Proxy Procedures . . . . . . . . 9
5.3. Edge Node DetNet Service and Forwarding Sub-Layer
Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Controller Plane (Management and Control) Considerations . . 11
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction
The Time-Sensitive Networking Task Group (TSN TG) within IEEE 802.1
Working Group deals with deterministic services through IEEE 802
networks. Deterministic Networking (DetNet) defined by IETF is a
service that can be offered by a L3 network to DetNet flows. General
background and concepts of DetNet can be found in [RFC8655].
This document specifies the use of a DetNet MPLS network to
interconnect TSN nodes/network segments. DetNet MPLS data plane is
defined in [RFC8964].
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
2. Terminology
2.1. Terms Used in This Document
This document uses the terminology and concepts established in the
DetNet architecture [RFC8655] and [RFC8938], and [RFC8964]. TSN
specific terms are defined in the TSN TG of IEEE 802.1 Working Group.
The reader is assumed to be familiar with these documents and their
terminology.
2.2. Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this document:
AC Attachment Circuit.
CE Customer Edge equipment.
d-CW DetNet Control Word.
DetNet Deterministic Networking.
DF DetNet Flow.
FRER Frame Replication and Elimination for Redundancy (TSN
function).
L2 Layer 2.
L2VPN Layer 2 Virtual Private Network.
L3 Layer 3.
LSR Label Switching Router.
MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching.
MPLS-TE Multiprotocol Label Switching - Traffic Engineering.
NSP Native Service Processing.
OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance.
PE Provider Edge.
PREOF Packet Replication, Elimination and Ordering Functions.
PW PseudoWire.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
S-PE Switching Provider Edge.
T-PE Terminating Provider Edge.
TSN Time-Sensitive Network.
2.3. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
3. IEEE 802.1 TSN Over DetNet MPLS Data Plane Scenario
Figure 1 shows IEEE 802.1 TSN end stations operating over a TSN aware
DetNet service running over an MPLS network. DetNet Edge Nodes sit
at the boundary of a DetNet domain. They are responsible for mapping
non-DetNet aware L2 traffic to DetNet services. They also support
the imposition and disposition of the required DetNet encapsulation.
These are functionally similar to pseudowire (PW) Terminating
Provider Edge (T-PE) nodes which use MPLS-TE LSPs. In this example
TSN Streams are simple applications over DetNet flows. The specific
of this operation are discussed later in this document.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
TSN Edge Transit Edge TSN
End System Node Node Node End System
(T-PE) (LSR) (T-PE)
+----------+ +----------+
| TSN | <---------End to End TSN Service----------> | TSN |
| Applic. | | Applic. |
+----------+ +.........+ +.........+ +----------+
| | | \S-Proxy: :S-Proxy/ | | |
| TSN | | +.+---+<-- DetNet flow -->+---+ | | | TSN |
| | |TSN| |Svc| |Svc| |TSN| | |
+----------+ +---+ +---+ +----------+ +---+ +---+ +----------+
| L2 | | L2| |Fwd| |Forwarding| |Fwd| |L2 | | L2 |
+------.---+ +-.-+ +-.-+ +---.----.-+ +--.+ +-.-+ +---.------+
: Link : / ,-----. \ : Link : / ,-----. \
+........+ +-[ Sub ]-+ +........+ +-[ TSN ]-+
[Network] [Network]
`-----' `-----'
|<------ DetNet MPLS ------>|
|<---------------------- TSN --------------------->|
Figure 1: A TSN over DetNet MPLS Enabled Network
In this example, edge nodes provide a service proxy function that
"associates" the DetNet flows and native flows (i.e., TSN Streams) at
the edge of the DetNet domain. TSN streams are treated as App-flows
for DetNet. The whole DetNet domain behaves as a TSN relay node for
the TSN streams. The service proxy behaves as a port of that TSN
relay node.
Figure 2 illustrates how DetNet can provide services for IEEE 802.1
TSN end systems, CE1 and CE2, over a DetNet enabled MPLS network.
Edge nodes, E1 and E2, insert and remove required DetNet data plane
encapsulation. The 'X' in the edge nodes and relay node, R1,
represent a potential DetNet compound flow packet replication and
elimination point. This conceptually parallels L2VPN services, and
could leverage existing related solutions as discussed below.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
TSN |<------- End to End DetNet Service ------>| TSN
Service | Transit Transit | Service
TSN (AC) | |<-Tnl->| |<-Tnl->| | (AC) TSN
End | V V 1 V V 2 V V | End
System | +--------+ +--------+ +--------+ | System
+---+ | | E1 |=======| R1 |=======| E2 | | +---+
| |--|----|._X_....|..DF1..|.._ _...|..DF3..|...._X_.|---|---| |
|CE1| | | \ | | X | | / | | |CE2|
| | | \_.|..DF2..|._/ \_..|..DF4..|._/ | | |
+---+ | |=======| |=======| | +---+
^ +--------+ +--------+ +--------+ ^
| Edge Node Relay Node Edge Node |
| (T-PE) (S-PE) (T-PE) |
| |
|<- TSN -> <------- TSN Over DetNet MPLS -------> <- TSN ->|
| |
|<-------- Time Sensitive Networking (TSN) Service ------->|
X = Service protection
DFx = DetNet member flow x over a TE LSP
AC = Attachment Circuit
Tnl = Tunnel
Figure 2: IEEE 802.1TSN Over DetNet
4. DetNet MPLS Data Plane
4.1. Overview
The basic approach defined in [RFC8964] supports the DetNet service
sub-layer based on existing pseudowire (PW) encapsulations and
mechanisms, and supports the DetNet forwarding sub-layer based on
existing MPLS Traffic Engineering encapsulations and mechanisms.
A node operating on a DetNet flow in the Detnet service sub-layer,
i.e. a node processing a DetNet packet which has the S-Label as top
of stack uses the local context associated with that S-Label, for
example a received F-Label, to determine what local DetNet
operation(s) are applied to that packet. An S-Label may be unique
when taken from the platform label space [RFC3031], which would
enable correct DetNet flow identification regardless of which input
interface or LSP the packet arrives on. The service sub-layer
functions (i.e., PREOF) use a DetNet control word (d-CW).
The DetNet MPLS data plane builds on MPLS Traffic Engineering
encapsulations and mechanisms to provide a forwarding sub-layer that
is responsible for providing resource allocation and explicit routes.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
The forwarding sub-layer is supported by one or more forwarding
labels (F-Labels).
DetNet edge/relay nodes are DetNet service sub-layer aware,
understand the particular needs of DetNet flows and provide both
DetNet service and forwarding sub-layer functions. They add, remove
and process d-CWs, S-Labels and F-labels as needed. MPLS DetNet
nodes and transit nodes include DetNet forwarding sub-layer
functions, notably, support for explicit routes and resource
allocation to eliminate (or reduce) congestion loss and jitter.
Unlike other DetNet node types, transit nodes provide no service sub-
layer processing.
4.2. TSN over DetNet MPLS Encapsulation
The basic encapsulation approach is to treat a TSN Stream as an App-
flow from the DetNet MPLS perspective. The corresponding example
shown in Figure 3. Note, that three example flows are shown in the
figure.
/-> +------+ +------+ +------+ TSN ^ ^
MPLS | | X | | X | | X |<- Appli : :
App-Flow <-+ +------+ +------+ +------+ cation : :(1)
| |TSN-L2| |TSN-L2| |TSN-L2| : v
\-> +---+======+--+======+--+======+-----+ :
| d-CW | | d-CW | | d-CW | :
DetNet-MPLS +------+ +------+ +------+ :(2)
|Labels| |Labels| |Labels| v
+---+======+--+======+--+======+-----+
Link/Sub-Network | L2 | | TSN | | UDP |
+------+ +------+ +------+
| IP |
+------+
| L2 |
+------+
(1) TSN Stream
(2) DetNet MPLS Flow
Figure 3: Examples of TSN over MPLS Encapsulation Formats
In the figure, "Application" indicates the application payload
carried by the TSN network. "MPLS App-Flow" indicates that the TSN
Stream is the payload from the perspective of the DetNet MPLS data
plane defined in [RFC8964]. A single DetNet MPLS flow can aggregate
multiple TSN Streams.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
Note: In order to avoid fragmentation (see section 5.3 of [RFC3985]),
the network operator has to make sure that all the DetNet
encapsulation overhead plus the TSN App-flow do not exceed the DetNet
network's MTU.
5. TSN over MPLS Data Plane Procedures
The description of Edge Nodes procedures and functions for TSN over
DetNet MPLS scenarios follows the concepts from [RFC3985], and covers
the Edge Nodes components shown in Figure 1. In this section the
following procedures of DetNet Edge Nodes are described:
o TSN related (Section 5.1)
o DetNet Service Proxy (Section 5.2)
o DetNet service and forwarding sub-layer (Section 5.3)
The sub-sections describe procedures for forwarding packets by DetNet
Edge nodes, where such packets are received from either directly
connected CEs (TSN nodes) or some other DetNet Edge nodes.
5.1. Edge Node TSN Procedures
The Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) Task Group of the IEEE 802.1
Working Group have defined (and are defining) a number of amendments
to [IEEE8021Q] that provide zero congestion loss and bounded latency
in bridged networks. [IEEE8021CB] defines packet replication and
elimination functions for a TSN network.
The implementation of TSN entity (i.e., TSN packet processing
functions) must be compliant with the relevant IEEE 802.1 standards.
TSN specific functions are executed on the data received by the
DetNet Edge Node from the connected CE before being forwarded to
connected CE(s) or presented to the DetNet Service Proxy function for
transmission across the DetNet domain. TSN specific functions are
also executed on the data received from a DetNet PW by a PE before
the data is output on the Attachment Circuit(s) (AC).
TSN packet processing function(s) of Edge Nodes (T-PE) are belonging
to the native service processing (NSP) [RFC3985] block. This is
similar to other functionalities being defined by standard bodies
other than the IETF (for example in case of Ethernet: stripping,
overwriting or adding VLAN tags, etc.). Depending on the TSN role of
the Edge Node in the end-to-end TSN service selected TSN functions
are supported.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
When a PE receives a packet from a CE, on a given AC with DetNet
service, it first checks via Stream Identification (see Clause 6. of
[IEEE8021CB] and [IEEEP8021CBdb]) whether the packet belongs to a
configured TSN Stream (i.e., App-flow from DetNet perspective). If
no Stream ID is matched and no other (VPN) service is configured for
the AC, then the packet MUST be dropped. If there is a matching TSN
Stream, then the Stream ID specific TSN functions are executed (e.g.,
ingress policing, header field manipulation in case of active Stream
Identification, FRER, etc.). Source MAC lookup may also be used for
local MAC address learning.
If the PE decides to forward the packet, the packet MUST be forwarded
according to the TSN Stream specific configuration to connected CE(s)
(in case of local bridging) and/or to the DetNet Service Proxy (in
case of forwarding to remote CE(s)). If there are no TSN Stream
specific forwarding configurations, the PE MUST flood the packet to
other locally attached CE(s) and to the DetNet Service Proxy. If the
administrative policy on the PE does not allow flooding, the PE MUST
drop the packet.
When a TSN entity of the PE receives a packet from the DetNet Service
Proxy, it first checks via Stream Identification (see Clause 6. of
[IEEE8021CB] and [IEEEP8021CBdb]) whether the packet belongs to a
configured TSN Stream. If no Stream ID is matched, then the packet
is dropped. If there is a matching TSN Stream, then the Stream ID
specific TSN functions are executed (e.g., header field manipulation
in case of active Stream Identification, FRER, etc.). Source MAC
lookup may also be used for local MAC address learning.
If the PE decides to forward the packet, the packet is forwarded
according to the TSN Stream specific configuration to connected
CE(s). If there are no TSN Stream specific forwarding
configurations, the PE floods the packet to locally attached CE(s).
If the administrative policy on the PE does not allow flooding, the
PE drops the packet.
Implementations of this document SHALL use management and control
information to ensure TSN specific functions of the Edge Node
according to the expectations of the connected TSN network.
5.2. Edge Node DetNet Service Proxy Procedures
The Service Proxy function maps between App-flows and DetNet flows.
The DetNet Edge Node TSN entity MUST support the TSN Stream
identification functions and the related managed objects as defined
in Clause 6. and Clause 9. of [IEEE8021CB] and [IEEEP8021CBdb] to
recognize the App-flow related packets. The Service Proxy presents
TSN Streams as an App-flow to a DetNet Flow.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
When a DetNet Service Proxy receives a packet from the TSN Entity it
MUST check whether such an App-flow is present in its mapping table.
If present it associates the internal DetNet flow-ID to the packet
and MUST forward it to the DetNet Service and Forwarding sub-layers.
If no match is found it MUST drop the packet.
When a DetNet Service Proxy receives a packet from the DetNet Service
and Forwarding sub-layers it MUST be forwarded to the Edge Node TSN
Entity.
Implementations of this document SHALL use management and control
information to map a TSN Stream to a DetNet flow. N:1 mapping
(aggregating multiple TSN Streams in a single DetNet flow) SHALL be
supported. The management or control function that provisions flow
mapping SHALL ensure that adequate resources are allocated and
configured to fulfil the service requirements of the mapped flows.
Due to the (intentional) similarities of the DetNet PREOF and TSN
FRER functions service protection function interworking is possible
between the TSN and the DetNet domains. Such service protection
interworking scenarios might require to copy sequence number fields
from TSN (L2) to PW (MPLS) encapsulation. However, such interworking
is out-of-scope in this document and left for further study.
5.3. Edge Node DetNet Service and Forwarding Sub-Layer Procedures
In the design of [RFC8964] an MPLS service label (the S-Label),
similar to a pseudowire (PW) label [RFC3985], is used to identify
both the DetNet flow identity and the payload MPLS payload type. The
DetNet sequence number is carried in the DetNet Control word (d-CW)
which carries the Data/OAM discriminator as well. In [RFC8964] two
sequence number sizes are supported: a 16 bit sequence number and a
28 bit sequence number.
PREOF functions and the provided service recovery is available only
within the DetNet domain as the DetNet flow-ID and the DetNet
sequence number are not valid outside the DetNet network. MPLS
(DetNet) Edge nodes terminate all related information elements
encoded in the MPLS labels.
When a PE receives a packet from the Service Proxy function it MUST
handle the packet as defined in [RFC8964].
When a PE receives an MPLS packet from a remote PE, then, after
processing the MPLS label stack, if the top MPLS label ends up being
a DetNet S-label that was advertised by this node, then the PE MUST
forward the packet according to the configured DetNet Service and
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
Forwarding sub-layer rules to other PE nodes or via the Detnet
Service Proxy function towards locally connected CE(s).
For further details on DetNet Service and Forwarding sub-layers see
[RFC8964].
6. Controller Plane (Management and Control) Considerations
TSN Stream(s) to DetNet flow mapping related information are required
only for the service proxy function of MPLS (DetNet) Edge nodes.
From the Data Plane perspective there is no practical difference
based on the origin of flow mapping related information (management
plane or control plane).
The following summarizes the set of information that is needed to
configure TSN over DetNet MPLS:
o TSN related configuration information according to the TSN role of
the DetNet MPLS node, as per [IEEE8021Q], [IEEE8021CB] and
[IEEEP8021CBdb].
o DetNet MPLS related configuration information according to the
DetNet role of the DetNet MPLS node, as per [RFC8964].
o App-Flow identification information to map received TSN Stream(s)
to the DetNet flow. Parameters of TSN stream identification are
defined in [IEEE8021CB] and [IEEEP8021CBdb].
This information MUST be provisioned per DetNet flow.
Mappings between DetNet and TSN management and control planes are out
of scope of the document. Some of the challanges are highligthed
below.
MPLS DetNet Edge nodes are member of both the DetNet domain and the
connected TSN network. From the TSN network perspective the MPLS
(DetNet) Edge node has a "TSN relay node" role, so TSN specific
management and control plane functionalities must be implemented.
There are many similarities in the management plane techniques used
in DetNet and TSN, but that is not the case for the control plane
protocols. For example, RSVP-TE and MSRP behaves differently.
Therefore management and control plane design is an important aspect
of scenarios, where mapping between DetNet and TSN is required.
Note that, as the DetNet network is just a portion of the end to end
TSN path (i.e., single hop from Ethernet perspective), some
parameters (e.g., delay) may differ significantly. Since there is no
interworking function the bandwidth of DetNet network is assumed to
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
be set large enough to handle all TSN Flows it will support. At the
egress of the Detnet Domain the MPLS headers are stripped and the TSN
flow continues on as a normal TSN flow.
In order to use a DetNet network to interconnect TSN segments, TSN
specific information must be converted to DetNet domain specific
ones. TSN Stream ID(s) and stream(s) related parameters/requirements
must be converted to a DetNet flow-ID and flow related parameters/
requirements.
In some case it may be challenging to determine some egress node
related information. For example, it may be not trivial to locate
the egress point/interface of a TSN Stream with a multicast
destination MAC address. Such scenarios may require interaction
between control and management plane functions and between DetNet and
TSN domains.
Mapping between DetNet flow identifiers and TSN Stream identifiers,
if not provided explicitly, can be done by the service proxy function
of an MPLS (DetNet) Edge node locally based on information provided
for configuration of the TSN Stream identification functions (e.g.,
Mask-and-Match Stream identification).
Triggering the setup/modification of a DetNet flow in the DetNet
network is an example where management and/or control plane
interactions are required between the DetNet and the TSN network.
Configuration of TSN specific functions (e.g., FRER) inside the TSN
network is a TSN domain specific decision and may not be visible in
the DetNet domain. Service protection interworking scenarios are
left for further study.
7. Security Considerations
Security considerations for DetNet are described in detail in
[I-D.ietf-detnet-security]. General security considerations are
described in [RFC8655].
DetNet MPLS data plane specific considerations are summarized and
described in [RFC8964] including any application flow types. This
document focuses on the scenario where TSN Streams are the
application flows for DetNet and it is already covered by those
DetNet MPLS data plane security considerations.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
8. IANA Considerations
This document makes no IANA requests.
9. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Norman Finn, Lou Berger, Craig Gunther,
Christophe Mangin and Jouni Korhonen for their various contributions
to this work.
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[IEEE8021CB]
IEEE 802.1, "Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks - Frame Replication and Elimination for
Reliability (IEEE Std 802.1CB-2017)", 2017,
<http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/>.
[IEEEP8021CBdb]
Mangin, C., "Extended Stream identification functions",
IEEE P802.1CBdb /D1.0 P802.1CBdb, September 2020,
<http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/private/db-drafts/d1/802-
1CBdb-d1-0.pdf>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol
Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3031, January 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3031>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,
"Deterministic Networking Architecture", RFC 8655,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8655, October 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8655>.
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
[RFC8938] Varga, B., Ed., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Malis, A., and S.
Bryant, "Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Data Plane
Framework", RFC 8938, DOI 10.17487/RFC8938, November 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8938>.
[RFC8964] Varga, B., Ed., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Malis, A., Bryant,
S., and J. Korhonen, "Deterministic Networking (DetNet)
Data Plane: MPLS", RFC 8964, DOI 10.17487/RFC8964, January
2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8964>.
10.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-detnet-security]
Grossman, E., Mizrahi, T., and A. Hacker, "Deterministic
Networking (DetNet) Security Considerations", draft-ietf-
detnet-security-13 (work in progress), December 2020.
[IEEE8021Q]
IEEE 802.1, "Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks--Bridges and Bridged Networks (IEEE Std 802.1Q-
2018)", 2018, <http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/>.
[RFC3985] Bryant, S., Ed. and P. Pate, Ed., "Pseudo Wire Emulation
Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) Architecture", RFC 3985,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3985, March 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3985>.
Authors' Addresses
Balazs Varga (editor)
Ericsson
Magyar Tudosok krt. 11.
Budapest 1117
Hungary
Email: balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com
Janos Farkas
Ericsson
Magyar Tudosok krt. 11.
Budapest 1117
Hungary
Email: janos.farkas@ericsson.com
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft TSN over DetNet MPLS February 2021
Andrew G. Malis
Malis Consulting
Email: agmalis@gmail.com
Stewart Bryant
Futurewei Technologies
Email: stewart.bryant@gmail.com
Don Fedyk
LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
Email: dfedyk@labn.net
Varga, et al. Expires August 23, 2021 [Page 15]
