Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Sounds good to me, I am just offering the view from the deployment side of things. Marek From: Glen Kramer <glen.kramer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Marek, I hear you. But it is also true for many other PON features – they are discussed and added to the standard, but are slow at being deployed. I am not particularly in favor of just deleting the trunk protection scheme. I think it would be weird that this feature exists in 1G-EPON and 10G-EPON specifications, but is removed in 25G-EPON and 50G-EPON. Besides, removing it is actually more draft work than fixing it. To remove it, we need to also remove some management attributes, modify some other attributes that are shared between the tree and the trunk protection schemes, update PICS, and modify the text referencing the removed material. I think it is easier to fix this feature. If it is indeed the case that the protected security data cannot or should not be shared among the different OLTs in different COs, the easiest fix is to say that the new OLT has to perform the startup sequence on its own, I.e., the ONUs get re-authenticated and encryption is re-established. We will need to get rid of 150 ms switching time target (not a mandatory requirement anyway). Annex 9A is not needed anymore. It describes two methods of deducing RTTs by the backup OLT without doing the MPCP discovery. One method doesn’t work if encryption is enabled. The other method is trivial to describe in just a few sentences in the main clause. I’ll work on modifying the trunk protection scheme, unless I hit another wall down the road. Glen From: Marek Hajduczenia <mxhajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx> Personal 2 cents, nothing more - I have not seen a live deployment of this feature to date for 1G or 10G PON. It has been spoken about, debated, etc., but getting it deployed is a separate topic altogether. Given the added complexity when OLT and ONU are mutually authenticated, I'd vote for a feature drop and extraction. We *could* go the route of how SAE is implemented in WPA3 in the wireless world but it will just add complexity to an already complex and unused feature of the PON systems. Marek On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 6:43 PM Glen Kramer <000006d1020766de-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-4-TF list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-4-TF&A=1 |