Hi Rodney, Thanks for the feedback. We will certainly take these notes into consideration in the next version.
Can you please elaborate which protocols use the 80-bit timestamp format (other than PTP, obviously)? Thanks, Tal. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Rodney Cummings <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Tal, > > This is an excellent draft. I have a couple of suggestions. > > 1. Add the PTP 80-bit Timestamp, since there are protocols using that as > well, some with hardware support. > > 2. In section 4, add informative text to explain one of the benefits of > specifying a small set of fixed format specifications: hardware support. > The lower down in the interface stack that timestamping occurs, the more > accurate and precise the timestamp. This is well known for PTP, for which > timestamping is often done at the MAC or PHY level. Hardware support is > potentially a reason to avoid the control field mentioned in section 7, > because hardware typically cannot support "any" format... ideally this RFC > will narrow it down to 2-3 at most. > > Rodney > > From: TICTOC [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tal Mizrahi > Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2017 8:38 AM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: [TICTOC] Guidelines for Defining Packet Timestamps > > Hi, > > We have revised the draft based on the comments received in IETF 99, and > based on the comments from Yaakov (thanks Yaakov). > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ > datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dmizrahi-2Dintarea- > 2Dpacket-2Dtimestamps_&d=DwMFaQ&c=I_0YwoKy7z5LMTVdyO6YCiE2uzI1jjZZ > uIPelcSjixA&r=WA71sf2o7Dw7CbYhFt24DPjt3lJuupswWYdnboKbZ8k&m= > yUZsj6L0ib9J4wu3kPNa1OQJK4MJPBl2vMca6Rpvx_Q&s=xdFj3xTP-9EZqma_ > 84T6eWQ0p0VlwMrdXil6FFU3FW0&e= > > The main changes compared to the previous version of the draft: > - We have extended the discussion about the factors that may affect the > choice of the timestamp format. > - A new section has been added, called "Timestamp Use Cases". > - The sychronization aspects have been separated from the timestamp > format, allowing the timestamp format to be independent of how time is > synchronized. > > Any further comments are welcome. > > Cheers, > Tal, Joachim, and Al. >
_______________________________________________ TICTOC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc
