Hi Doug,

TC are not supposed to change source IP address of delay requests.

If the TC is a layer2 switch/bridge, it must not modify the source MAC address 
while forwarding and must never touch the layer3 addresses.
If the TC is a layer3 IP router, it must not modify the source IP address while 
forwarding and must change the source MAC address to the MAC address of its 
egress port.

If the TC is a layer4 device, e.g., a NAT device, it modifies the source IP 
address of messages as it is its functionality. It may be the case that such 
functionality is required in the enterprise. My point is that it is far from 
obvious and the draft needs to elaborate why it's needed.

>> This is required by the standards that specify the transport networks.
I would appreciate if you point to the relevant standards.

The draft states that additional support is required for this deployment 
scenario:
"For this deployment scenario timeTransmitters will need to have configured 
tables of timeReceivers' IP addresses and associated Clock Identities in order 
to send Delay Responses to the correct PTP Nodes"

These tables would be part of the IEEE1588 spec if this TC behavior was 
standard. It is not trivial to add support for these tables in HW, if you want 
to support scale and speed.

Best,
Ron

From: Doug Arnold <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 12:36 AM
To: Ron Cohen <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Enterprise Profile: Support for Non standard TCs

Prioritize security for external emails: Confirm sender and content safety 
before clicking links or opening attachments
________________________________
Hello Ron,

Yes.  A TC is required to change the source address of a message at least for 
Ethernet and IP mappings.  This is not an IEEE 1588 decision.  This is required 
by the standards that specify the transport networks. Ethernet (IEEE 802.1Q) 
IPv4 and IPv6.  A TC effectively changes the payload of the messages from the 
point of view of L2 and L3, so it is a new frame and new packet to those 
layers.  I think that IPv4 has an option to alter a message in-route, but the 
node is supposed to zero out the source address.

Regards,
Doug

________________________________
From: Ron Cohen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2024 12:43 PM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [TICTOC]Enterprise Profile: Support for Non standard TCs


Hi,



I'm late to the game here. I apologize in advance if this has already been 
discussed and decided:



I can't figure out why the profile needs to support non-standard TCs, or what 
seems to be a strange combination of a NAT+TC devices:



"In PTP Networks that contain Transparent Clocks, timeTransmitters

   might receive Delay Request messages that no longer contains the IP

   Addresses of the timeReceivers.  This is because Transparent Clocks

   might replace the IP address of Delay Requests with their own IP

   address after updating the Correction Fields.  For this deployment

   scenario timeTransmitters will need to have configured tables of

   timeReceivers' IP addresses and associated Clock Identities in order

   to send Delay Responses to the correct PTP Nodes."



Is a standard TC allowed to change the source IP address of messages?



There should be a strong reason to require support for such devices in a 
standard profile.



Best,

Ron



/*

*  Ron Cohen

*  Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

*  Mobile: +972.54.5751506

*/


_______________________________________________
TICTOC mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to