1 / 5

Exploring Synchronization Use Cases: 1588 and NTP in Diverse Network Environments

The proposed charter outlines three key use cases for time synchronization protocols such as 1588 and NTP across different network scenarios. The first case details service provider networks emphasizing well-engineered, low-latency environments with strong security controls. The second case discusses general networks characterized by best-effort performance and potential security risks. The final interworking case highlights the integration of both types of networks, showcasing how 1588 and NTP can coexist despite differing semantics and implementation strategies, allowing for effective time distribution and frequency reference establishment.

yoshi-fuller
Télécharger la présentation

Exploring Synchronization Use Cases: 1588 and NTP in Diverse Network Environments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UseCases TICTOC BOF– 70th IETF 4 December 2007 Yaakov (J) Stein

  2. Three Cases The proposed charter specifies three use cases: • Service Provider (SP) network • well engineered • on-path support • walled garden security • 1588 preferred • General network (e.g. public Internet) • best effort network behavior • no on-path support • security suspect • NTP preferred • Interworking case • on one side - SP network • on other side - general network We need to consider frequency and time distribution

  3. Service Provider Network Well engineered • Connection oriented (CO) or explicitly routed • Low packet loss • Low Packet Delay Variation (PDV) On-path support • Synchronous Ethernet (Sync-E) • Boundary clocks • Transparent clocks Walled garden security • core network elements under strict control • client access limited and has well-defined interfaces This is the environment where • 1588 • Sync-E combined with 1588 is preferred

  4. General Network Best effort network behavior • packet loss • PDV and outliers No on-path support • PDV degrades frequency recovery • ranging requires minimum gating Security suspect • false clock sources This is the environment where NTP is widely deployed

  5. SP network General network 1588? NTP? time source client IWF master Interworking Case Both types of network present NTP and 1588 have roughly similar semantics • establish local frequency reference • ranging with minimum gating • control loop algorithms but different syntax • message types • timestamp format (TAI/UTC, resolution) In principle, always possible to recreate time source and redistribute

More Related