Hello Everyone,

Please note that a new = version of the proposed Enterprise Profile was uploaded approximately one m= onth ago. =A0http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tictoc-p= tp-enterprise-profile/

Changes, other than minor typos, are:

1. Elimination of the Unicast only and Multicast only modes of oper= ation. =A0The only mode of operation is the hybrid multicast/unicast mode. = =A0In this mode the master sends sync and announce as multicast, and it res= ponds to delay request messages "in kind". =A0In other words a de= lay response is unicast if the delay requests is unicast, and multicast if = the delay requests is multicast.

2. The option for multiple simultaneous masters uses se= parate timing domains instead of the alternate master flag. =A0Here I am at= tempting to guess how the next revision to IEEE 1588 will go. =A0

3. =A0The prohibition against distributing time zones remain= s unchanged. =A0See the posts to the tictoc reflector by Kevin Gross and Jo= hn Fletcher for a good discussion on the pros and cons of this choice. =A0<= a href=3D"http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tictoc/current/maillist.html= ">http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tictoc/current/maillist.html

Please take a look and tell me what you think?

Doug Arnold

Principal T= echnologist

JTime!=A0Meinberg USA

+1-707-303= -5559

--089e0141a46c2b718204f46e06f7-- From nobody Wed Mar 12 15:39:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D301A0758 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:39:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.027 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.027 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uiIFhJgVZGDU for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ie0-x236.google.com (mail-ie0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FCB81A063F for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id y20so161693ier.27 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:39:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=GgXNBo5r7Tc9vGZRYXJlFnrZ86SwR+8pWzEteNtvEew=; b=MLPJaIwZ96CjSe6gkNRN6koFB8yal9tXGzbJmpxxM6OqL0l9Y05jQmpjBreAARD4xw xdY1el4r3gYTge3ig4kQGhYcQc2MTiGFFvd7YLZyzGgL12nufnt336H+isHVMrkgE1T+ 9vzwRqoUncrdLTfw6ns5ZyzFtPBDzj4/ZrvNlJuMQA5r3CQ8Lyx/KwlK0/Q8/8cbdfY+ qVS8r4Azvd1dL9IpjlHN2mnRN8MThUQfKqN3lLuohkz0WvdWX7WMv/gCym1MGmTMuKdr GqKIgGFGVhohdzY9DAtsq7n+a3coRsZ2NKs08lomqR2X/UUevFDZr3NDs/uKp2SpFsN5 xb6Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.9.69 with SMTP id x5mr845134iga.12.1394663957483; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:39:17 -0700 (PDT) Sender: doug.arnold2@gmail.com Received: by 10.64.5.66 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:39:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF4DF7D6@sjsrvexchmbx1.microsemi.net> References: <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF4DF7D6@sjsrvexchmbx1.microsemi.net> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:39:17 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: TxbvaUoFiTvdG1J-HZl_xzzGyuw Message-ID: From: Douglas Arnold To: "Dowd, Greg" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2fff8c4555f04f470812c Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tictoc/uWT9EZXvi14cP9En316D1mLo38Y Cc: "tictoc@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [TICTOC] Enterprise profile update X-BeenThere: tictoc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Timing over IP Connection and Transfer of Clock BOF List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:39:27 -0000 --001a11c2fff8c4555f04f470812c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Greg, I haven't heard of this idea until now. I was under the impression that multicast support was generally improving. So I was hoping that the multicast support issue was going away on its own. Nevertheless this is an interesting suggestion. Do you have any feel for how often the broadcast modes are used in NTP? Doug On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Dowd, Greg wrote: > Hi Doug, > > Because of some of the difficulties, or lack of support, > in getting multicast deployed, has anyone considered directed broadcast for > the sync/fup pairs? That would be similar to the ntp deployment models > that have broadcast/directed broadcast (unicast sent to network address) > with "ranging" provided by client unicast requests. > > > > > > *From:* TICTOC [mailto:tictoc-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Douglas > Arnold > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:42 PM > *To:* tictoc@ietf.org > *Subject:* [TICTOC] Enterprise profile update > > > > Hello Everyone, > > > > Please note that a new version of the proposed Enterprise Profile was > uploaded approximately one month ago. > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile/ > > > > Changes, other than minor typos, are: > > > > 1. Elimination of the Unicast only and Multicast only modes of operation. > The only mode of operation is the hybrid multicast/unicast mode. In this > mode the master sends sync and announce as multicast, and it responds to > delay request messages "in kind". In other words a delay response is > unicast if the delay requests is unicast, and multicast if the delay > requests is multicast. > > > > 2. The option for multiple simultaneous masters uses separate timing > domains instead of the alternate master flag. Here I am attempting to > guess how the next revision to IEEE 1588 will go. > > > > 3. The prohibition against distributing time zones remains unchanged. > See the posts to the tictoc reflector by Kevin Gross and John Fletcher for > a good discussion on the pros and cons of this choice. > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tictoc/current/maillist.html > > > > Please take a look and tell me what you think? > > > > -- > > Doug Arnold > > Principal Technologist > > *JTime!* Meinberg USA > > +1-707-303-5559 > > > -- Doug Arnold Principal Technologist *JTime!* Meinberg USA +1-707-303-5559 --001a11c2fff8c4555f04f470812c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Greg,

I haven't heard of this id= ea until now. =A0I was under the impression that multicast support was gene= rally improving. =A0So I was hoping that the multicast support issue was go= ing away on its own. =A0Nevertheless this is an interesting suggestion. =A0= Do you have any feel for how often the broadcast modes are used in NTP?

Doug

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Dowd, Greg <= Greg.Dowd@microsemi.com> wrote:

Hi Doug,

=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Because of some of the difficulties, or lack of suppo= rt, in getting multicast deployed, has anyone considered directed broadcast= for the sync/fup pairs?=A0 That would be similar to the ntp deployment models that have bro= adcast/directed broadcast (unicast sent to network address) with "rang= ing" provided by client unicast requests.

=A0<= /p>
=A0<= /p>
From: TICTOC= [mailto:ticto= c-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Douglas Arnold
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:42 PM
To: tictoc@ietf= .org
Subject: [TICTOC] Enterprise profile update
=

=A0

Hello Everyone,

=A0

Please note that a new version of the proposed Enter= prise Profile was uploaded approximately one month ago. =A0http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterpri= se-profile/

=A0

Changes, other than minor typos, are:<= /p>

=A0

1. Elimination of the Unicast only and Multicast onl= y modes of operation. =A0The only mode of operation is the hybrid multicast= /unicast mode. =A0In this mode the master sends sync and announce as multic= ast, and it responds to delay request messages "in kind". =A0In other words a delay response is unicas= t if the delay requests is unicast, and multicast if the delay requests is = multicast.

=A0

2. The option for multiple simultaneous masters uses= separate timing domains instead of the alternate master flag. =A0Here I am= attempting to guess how the next revision to IEEE 1588 will go. =A0=

=A0

3. =A0The prohibition against distributing time zone= s remains unchanged. =A0See the posts to the tictoc reflector by Kevin Gros= s and John Fletcher for a good discussion on the pros and cons of this choi= ce. =A0http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tictoc/cur= rent/maillist.html

=A0

Please take a look and tell me what you think?

=A0

--

Doug Arnold

Principal Technologist

JTime!=A0Meinberg USA

+1-707-303-5559

=A0

Doug Arnold

Principal Technologist

JTime!=A0Meinber= g USA

+1-707-303-5559

--001a11c2fff8c4555f04f470812c-- From Greg.Dowd@microsemi.com Wed Mar 12 13:02:03 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CAA11A074A for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:02:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nr8H2zERPB0A for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:02:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2lp0205.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.205]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 057E41A04D2 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:01:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CO1PR02CA001.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.242.160.21) by BY2PR02MB348.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.141.140.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.893.10; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:01:45 +0000 Received: from BY2FFO11FD016.protection.gbl (2a01:111:f400:7c0c::117) by CO1PR02CA001.outlook.office365.com (2a01:111:e400:1014::21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.898.11 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:01:45 +0000 Received: from avsrvexchhts1.microsemi.net (208.19.100.21) by BY2FFO11FD016.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.1.14.148) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.888.9 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:01:44 +0000 Received: from SJSRVEXCHHTS1.microsemi.net (10.241.34.105) by avsrvexchhts1.microsemi.net (10.100.34.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.347.0; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:01:44 -0700 Received: from SJSRVEXCHMBX1.microsemi.net ([fe80::19b5:ac43:d8de:5120]) by sjsrvexchhts1.microsemi.net ([::1]) with mapi id 14.02.0347.000; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:01:24 -0700 From: "Dowd, Greg" To: Douglas Arnold , "tictoc@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [TICTOC] Enterprise profile update Thread-Index: AQHPPi1eBr8WMCicuUq6V+2F/hm7i5rd3sBQ Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:01:23 +0000 Message-ID: <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF4DF7D6@sjsrvexchmbx1.microsemi.net> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.200.160.250] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF4DF7D6sjsrvexchmbx1micr_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: =?us-ascii?Q?CIP:208.19.100.21; CTRY:US; IPV:NLI; EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(1001?= =?us-ascii?Q?9001)(428001)(199002)(189002)(377454003)(53754006)(80022001)?= =?us-ascii?Q?(53416003)(93136001)(80976001)(15202345003)(31966008)(658160?= =?us-ascii?Q?01)(95416001)(74502001)(92726001)(94946001)(15975445006)(879?= =?us-ascii?Q?36001)(47446002)(81686001)(16796002)(83072002)(16236675002)(?= =?us-ascii?Q?76796001)(56816005)(74876001)(90146001)(33656001)(85852003)(?= =?us-ascii?Q?93516002)(76786001)(69226001)(53806001)(19300405004)(1958040?= =?us-ascii?Q?5001)(63696002)(20776003)(92566001)(84326002)(55846006)(6806?= =?us-ascii?Q?004)(50986001)(49866001)(4396001)(85306002)(47976001)(461020?= =?us-ascii?Q?01)(74706001)(47736001)(74366001)(2656002)(51856001)(4497600?= =?us-ascii?Q?5)(87266001)(81542001)(79102001)(77096001)(83322001)(9566600?= =?us-ascii?Q?3)(512954002)(97336001)(56776001)(86362001)(54316002)(943160?= =?us-ascii?Q?02)(74662001)(76482001)(54356001)(81816001)(81342001)(779820?= =?us-ascii?Q?01)(19580395003)(97186001)(71186001);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102;SCL:1;?= =?us-ascii?Q?SRVR:BY2PR02MB348;H:avsrvexchhts1.microsemi.net;CLIP:208.19.?= =?us-ascii?Q?100.21;FPR:881AF115.12FA87D1.30D33FB7.40F49C49.202F1;MLV:sfv?= =?us-ascii?Q?;PTR:InfoDomainNonexistent;A:1;MX:1;LANG:en;?= X-Forefront-PRVS: 01480965DA Received-SPF: None (: microsemi.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-OriginatorOrg: microsemi.com Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tictoc/Et-1CrMUiPePxeGYntynNFmWXnA X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:43:56 -0700 Subject: Re: [TICTOC] Enterprise profile update X-BeenThere: tictoc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Timing over IP Connection and Transfer of Clock BOF List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:02:54 -0000 --_000_8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF4DF7D6sjsrvexchmbx1micr_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Doug, Because of some of the difficulties, or lack of support, in= getting multicast deployed, has anyone considered directed broadcast for t= he sync/fup pairs? That would be similar to the ntp deployment models that= have broadcast/directed broadcast (unicast sent to network address) with "= ranging" provided by client unicast requests. From: TICTOC [mailto:tictoc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Douglas Arnold Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:42 PM To: tictoc@ietf.org Subject: [TICTOC] Enterprise profile update Hello Everyone, Please note that a new version of the proposed Enterprise Profile was uploa= ded approximately one month ago. http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iet= f-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile/ Changes, other than minor typos, are: 1. Elimination of the Unicast only and Multicast only modes of operation. = The only mode of operation is the hybrid multicast/unicast mode. In this m= ode the master sends sync and announce as multicast, and it responds to del= ay request messages "in kind". In other words a delay response is unicast = if the delay requests is unicast, and multicast if the delay requests is mu= lticast. 2. The option for multiple simultaneous masters uses separate timing domain= s instead of the alternate master flag. Here I am attempting to guess how = the next revision to IEEE 1588 will go. 3. The prohibition against distributing time zones remains unchanged. See= the posts to the tictoc reflector by Kevin Gross and John Fletcher for a g= ood discussion on the pros and cons of this choice. http://www.ietf.org/ma= il-archive/web/tictoc/current/maillist.html Please take a look and tell me what you think? -- Doug Arnold Principal Technologist JTime! Meinberg USA +1-707-303-5559 --_000_8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF4DF7D6sjsrvexchmbx1micr_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Doug,

&= nbsp; Because o= f some of the difficulties, or lack of support, in getting multicast deploy= ed, has anyone considered directed broadcast for the sync/fup pairs? That would be similar to the ntp deployment models that have = broadcast/directed broadcast (unicast sent to network address) with "r= anging" provided by client unicast requests.

<= /p>

From: TICTOC= [mailto:tictoc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Douglas Arnold
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:42 PM
To: tictoc@ietf.org
Subject: [TICTOC] Enterprise profile update

Hello Everyone,

Please note that a new version of the proposed Enter= prise Profile was uploaded approximately one month ago. ht= tp://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile/=

Changes, other than minor typos, are:

1. Elimination of the Unicast only and Multicast onl= y modes of operation. The only mode of operation is the hybrid multic= ast/unicast mode. In this mode the master sends sync and announce as = multicast, and it responds to delay request messages "in kind". In other words a delay response is uni= cast if the delay requests is unicast, and multicast if the delay requests = is multicast.

2. The option for multiple simultaneous masters uses= separate timing domains instead of the alternate master flag. Here I= am attempting to guess how the next revision to IEEE 1588 will go. <= o:p>

3. The prohibition against distributing time z= ones remains unchanged. See the posts to the tictoc reflector by Kevi= n Gross and John Fletcher for a good discussion on the pros and cons of thi= s choice. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tictoc/current/mail= list.html

Please take a look and tell me what you think?

Doug Arnold

Principal Technologist

JTime! Meinberg USA

+1-707-303-5559

--_000_8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF4DF7D6sjsrvexchmbx1micr_--