wdiff rfc9037.original rfc9037.txt

DetNet

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) B. Varga, Ed.
Internet-Draft
Request for Comments: 9037 J. Farkas
Intended status:
Category: Informational Ericsson
Expires: August 23, 2021
ISSN: 2070-1721 A. Malis
Malis Consulting
S. Bryant
Futurewei Technologies
February 19,
June 2021

DetNet

Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Data Plane: MPLS over IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive Time-
Sensitive Networking (TSN)
draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-tsn-07

Abstract

This document specifies the Deterministic Networking (DetNet) MPLS
data plane when operating over an IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive
Networking (TSN) sub-network. This document does not define new
procedures or processes. Whenever this document makes statements or
recommendations, these they are taken from normative text in the referenced
RFCs.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft document is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.

This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list It represents the consensus of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents valid
approved by the IESG are candidates for a maximum any level of Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of six months RFC 7841.

Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents obtained at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on August 23, 2021.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9037.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Terms Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. DetNet MPLS Data Plane Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. DetNet MPLS Operation Over over IEEE 802.1 TSN Sub-Networks . . . 4 Sub-networks
4.1. Functions for DetNet Flow to TSN Stream Mapping . . . . . 6
4.2. TSN requirements Requirements of MPLS DetNet nodes . . . . . . . . . . 6 Nodes
4.3. Service protection Protection within the TSN sub-network . . . . . . 8 Sub-network
4.4. Aggregation during DetNet flow Flow to TSN Stream mapping . . 8 Mapping
5. Management and Control Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9.1.
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9.2.
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Acknowledgements
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

1. Introduction

Deterministic Networking (DetNet) is a service that can be offered by
a network to DetNet flows. DetNet provides these flows with low
packet loss rate and assured maximum end-to-end delivery latency.
General background and concepts of DetNet can be found in [RFC8655].

The DetNet Architecture architecture decomposes the DetNet related DetNet-related data plane
functions into two sub-layers: a service sub-layer and a forwarding
sub-layer. The service sub-layer is used to provide DetNet service
protection and reordering. The forwarding sub-layer is used to
provide congestion protection (low loss, assured latency, and limited
reordering) leveraging MPLS Traffic Engineering mechanisms.

[RFC8964] specifies the DetNet data plane operation for an MPLS-based
Packet Switched Network (PSN). MPLS encapsulated
PSN. MPLS-encapsulated DetNet flows can be carried over network
technologies that can provide the DetNet
required DetNet-required level of service.
This document focuses on the scenario where MPLS (DetNet) nodes are
interconnected by a an IEEE 802.1 TSN sub-
network. sub-network. There is close
cooperation between the IETF DetNet WG Working Group and the IEEE 802.1 TSN TG.
Time-Sensitive Networking Task Group (TSN TG).

2. Terminology

2.1. Terms Used in This Document

This document uses the terminology established in the DetNet
architecture [RFC8655] and [RFC8964]. TSN specific TSN-specific terms are defined in
the TSN TG of the IEEE 802.1 Working Group. The reader is assumed to
be familiar with these documents and their terminology.

2.2. Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this document:

A-Label Aggregation label, label; a special case of an S-Label.

d-CW DetNet Control Word. Word

DetNet Deterministic Networking. Networking

F-Label Forwarding label that identifies the LSP used by a
DetNet flow.

FRER Frame Replication and Elimination for Redundancy (TSN
function).
function)

L2 Layer 2. 2

L3 Layer 3. 3

LSP Label Switched Path

MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching. Switching

PREOF Packet Replication, Elimination Elimination, and Ordering Functions. Functions

PSN Packet Switched Network. Network

PW PseudoWire. Pseudowire

RSVP-TE Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering. Engineering

S-Label Service label. label

TSN Time-Sensitive Network. Networking

3. DetNet MPLS Data Plane Overview

The basic approach defined in [RFC8964] supports the DetNet service
sub-layer based on existing pseudowire (PW) PW encapsulations and
mechanisms, mechanisms and
supports the DetNet forwarding sub-layer based on existing MPLS
Traffic Engineering encapsulations and mechanisms.

A node operating operates on a DetNet flow in the Detnet DetNet service sub-layer,
i.e.
i.e., a node processing a DetNet packet which that has the S-Label service label
(S-Label) as the top of stack uses the local context associated with
that service label
(S-Label), S-Label, for example example, a received forwarding label (F-Label), to
determine what local DetNet operation(s) are is applied to that packet.
An S-Label may be unique when taken from the platform label space
[RFC3031], which would enable correct DetNet flow identification
regardless of which input interface or LSP the packet arrives on.
The service sub-layer functions (i.e., PREOF) use a DetNet control
word (d-CW). d-CW.

The DetNet MPLS data plane builds on MPLS Traffic Engineering
encapsulations and mechanisms to provide a forwarding sub-layer that
is responsible for providing resource allocation and explicit routes.
The forwarding sub-layer is supported by one or more F-Labels.

DetNet edge/relay nodes are DetNet service sub-layer aware, sub-layer-aware,
understand the particular needs of DetNet flows flows, and provide both
DetNet service and forwarding sub-layer functions. They add, remove remove,
and process d-CWs, S-Labels S-Labels, and F-labels F-Labels as needed. MPLS DetNet
nodes and transit nodes include DetNet forwarding sub-layer
functions, notably notable support for explicit routes, and resources resource
allocation to eliminate (or reduce) congestion loss and jitter.
Unlike other DetNet node types, transit nodes provide no service sub-
layer processing.

MPLS (DetNet) nodes and transit nodes interconnected by a TSN sub-
network are the primary focus of this document. The mapping of
DetNet MPLS flows to TSN streams Streams and TSN protection mechanisms are
covered in Section 4.

4. DetNet MPLS Operation Over over IEEE 802.1 TSN Sub-Networks Sub-networks

The DetNet WG collaborates with IEEE 802.1 TSN in order to define a
common architecture for both Layer 2 and Layer 3, 3 that maintains
consistency across diverse networks. Both DetNet MPLS and TSN use
the same techniques to provide their deterministic service:

* Service protection.

o protection

* Resource allocation.

o allocation

* Explicit routes. routes

As described in the DetNet architecture [RFC8655] [RFC8655], from the MPLS
perspective, a sub-network provides from MPLS perspective a single hop single-hop connection between
MPLS (DetNet) nodes. Functions used for resource allocation and
explicit routes are treated as domain internal functions and do not
require function interworking across the DetNet MPLS network and the
TSN sub-
network. sub-network.

In the case of the service protection function function, due to the
similarities of the DetNet PREOF and TSN FRER functions functions, some level
of interworking is possible. However, such interworking is out-of-scope
in out of
scope of this document and left for further study.

Figure 1 illustrates a scenario, scenario where two MPLS (DetNet) nodes are
interconnected by a TSN sub-network. Node-1 is single homed single-homed, and
Node-2 is dual-homed to the TSN sub-network.

MPLS (DetNet) MPLS (DetNet)
Node-1 Node-2

+----------+ +----------+
<--| Service* |-- DetNet flow ---| Service* |-->
+----------+ +----------+
|Forwarding| |Forwarding|
+--------.-+ <-TSN Str-> +-.-----.--+
\ ,-------. / /
+----[ TSN-Sub ]---+ TSN Sub-]---+ /
[ Network network ]--------+
`-------'
<---------------- DetNet MPLS --------------->

Note: * no service sub-layer required for transit nodes

Figure 1: DetNet Enabled DetNet-Enabled MPLS Network Over over a TSN Sub-Network Sub-network

At the time of this writing, the Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) Task
Group TSN TG of the IEEE 802.1 Working
Group have defined (and are defining) a number of amendments to
[IEEE8021Q] that provide zero congestion loss and bounded latency in
bridged networks. Furthermore Furthermore, [IEEE8021CB] defines frame
replication and elimination functions for reliability that should
prove both compatible with and useful to, to DetNet networks. All these
functions have to identify flows those that require TSN treatment (i.e.,
applying TSN functions during forwarding).

TSN capabilities of the TSN sub-network are made available for MPLS
(DetNet) flows via the protocol interworking function defined in
Annex C.5 of [IEEE8021CB]. For example, when applied on the TSN edge port
port, it can convert an ingress unicast MPLS (DetNet) flow to use a
specific Layer-2 Layer 2 multicast destination MAC Media Access Control (MAC)
address and a VLAN, in order to direct the packet through a specific
path inside the bridged network. A similar interworking function
pair at the other end of the TSN sub-network would restore the packet
to its original Layer-2 Layer 2 destination MAC address and VLAN.

Placement

The placement of TSN functions depends on the TSN capabilities of the
nodes along the path. MPLS (DetNet) Nodes nodes may or may not support TSN
functions. For a given TSN Stream (i.e., DetNet flow) flow), an MPLS
(DetNet) node is treated as a Talker or a Listener inside the TSN
sub-network.

4.1. Functions for DetNet Flow to TSN Stream Mapping

Mapping of a DetNet MPLS flow to a TSN Stream is provided via the
combination of a passive and an active stream Stream identification function
that operate at the frame level. The passive stream Stream identification
function is used to catch the MPLS label(s) of a DetNet MPLS flow flow,
and the active stream Stream identification function is used to modify the
Ethernet header according to the ID of the mapped TSN Stream.

Clause 6.8 of [IEEEP8021CBdb] defines a Mask-and-Match Stream
identification function that can be used as a passive function for
MPLS DetNet flows.

Clause 6.6 of [IEEE8021CB] defines an Active Destination MAC and a
VLAN Stream identification function, what function that can replace some Ethernet
header
fields fields, namely (1) the destination MAC-address, MAC address, (2) the VLAN-ID VLAN-
ID, and (3) priority parameters with alternate values. Replacement
is provided for the frame that is passed either down the stack from
the upper layers or up the stack from the lower layers.

Active Destination MAC and VLAN Stream identification can be used
within a Talker to set flow identity or a Listener to recover the
original addressing information. It can also be used also in a TSN bridge
that is providing translation as a proxy service for an End System. end system.

4.2. TSN requirements Requirements of MPLS DetNet nodes Nodes

This section covers required behavior of a TSN-aware MPLS (DetNet)
node using a TSN sub-network. The implementation of TSN packet packet-
processing functions must be compliant with the relevant IEEE 802.1
standards.

From the TSN sub-network perspective perspective, MPLS (DetNet) nodes are treated
as a Talker or Listener, that which may be (1) TSN-unaware or (2) TSN-aware. TSN-
aware.

In cases of TSN-unaware MPLS DetNet nodes nodes, the TSN relay nodes within
the TSN sub-network must modify the Ethernet encapsulation of the
DetNet MPLS flow (e.g., MAC translation, VLAN-ID setting, Sequence sequence
number addition, etc.) to allow proper TSN specific TSN-specific handling inside
the sub-network. There are no requirements defined for TSN-unaware
MPLS DetNet nodes in this document.

MPLS (DetNet) nodes being that are TSN-aware can be treated as a
combination of a TSN-unaware Talker/Listener and a TSN-Relay, as
shown in Figure 2. In such cases cases, the MPLS (DetNet) node must
provide the TSN
sub-network specific sub-network-specific Ethernet encapsulation over the
link(s) towards the sub-network.

MPLS (DetNet)
Node
<---------------------------------->

Note: * no service sub-layer required for transit nodes

Figure 2: MPLS (DetNet) Node with TSN Functions

A TSN-aware MPLS (DetNet) node implementation must support the Stream
Identification
identification TSN component for recognizing flows.

A Stream identification component must be able to instantiate the
following functions functions: (1) Active Destination MAC and VLAN Stream
identification function, (2) Mask-and-Match Stream identification
function
function, and (3) the related managed objects in Clause 9 of
[IEEE8021CB] and [IEEEP8021CBdb].

A TSN-aware MPLS (DetNet) node implementation must support the
Sequencing function and the Sequence encode/decode function as
defined in Clause Clauses 7.4 and 7.6 of [IEEE8021CB] in order for FRER to
be used inside the TSN sub-network.

The Sequence encode/decode function must support the Redundancy tag
(R-TAG) format as per Clause 7.8 of [IEEE8021CB].

A TSN-aware MPLS (DetNet) node implementation must support the Stream
splitting function and the Individual recovery function as defined in
Clause 7.7 and
Clauses 7.5 and 7.7 of [IEEE8021CB] in order for that node to be a
replication or elimination point for FRER.

4.3. Service protection Protection within the TSN sub-network Sub-network

TSN Streams supporting DetNet flows may use Frame Replication and
Elimination for Redundancy (FRER) FRER as defined in Clause 8.
8 of [IEEE8021CB] based on the loss service requirements of the TSN
Stream, which is derived from the DetNet service requirements of the
DetNet mapped flow. The specific operation of FRER is not modified
by the use of DetNet and follows [IEEE8021CB].

FRER function and the provided service recovery is available only
within the TSN sub-network as the TSN Stream-ID and the TSN sequence
number are not valid outside the sub-network. An MPLS (DetNet) node
represents a an L3 border border, and as such such, it terminates all related
information elements encoded in the L2 frames.

As the Stream-ID and the TSN sequence number are paired with the similar
MPLS flow parameters, FRER can be combined with PREOF functions.
Such service protection interworking scenarios may require to move moving
sequence number fields among TSN (L2) and PW (MPLS)
encapsulations encapsulations,
and they are left for further study.

4.4. Aggregation during DetNet flow Flow to TSN Stream mapping Mapping

Implementation of this document shall use management and control
information to map a DetNet flow to a TSN Stream. N:1 mapping
(aggregating DetNet flows in a single TSN Stream) shall be supported.
The management or control function that provisions flow mapping shall
ensure that adequate resources are allocated and configured to
provide proper service requirements of the mapped flows.

5. Management and Control Implications

Information related to DetNet flow and TSN Stream mapping related information are is required
only for TSN-aware MPLS (DetNet) nodes. From the Data Plane
perspective data plane
perspective, there is no practical difference based on the origin of
flow mapping related
flow-mapping-related information (management plane or control plane).

The following summarizes the set of information that is needed to
configure DetNet MPLS over TSN:

* DetNet MPLS related MPLS-related configuration information according to the
DetNet role of the DetNet MPLS node, as per [RFC8964].

o TSN related

* TSN-related configuration information according to the TSN role of
the DetNet MPLS node, as per [IEEE8021Q], [IEEE8021CB] [IEEE8021CB], and
[IEEEP8021CBdb].

* Mapping between a DetNet MPLS flow(s) (label information: A-labels,
S-labels
A-Labels, S-Labels, and F-labels F-Labels as defined in [RFC8964]) and a
TSN Stream(s) (as stream Stream identification information defined in
[IEEEP8021CBdb]).
Note, Note that managed objects for TSN Stream
identification can be found in [IEEEP8021CBcv].

This information must be provisioned per DetNet flow.

Mappings between DetNet and TSN management and control planes are out
of scope of the this document. Some of the challenges are highlighted
below.

TSN-aware MPLS DetNet nodes are members of both the DetNet domain and
the TSN sub-network. Within the TSN sub-network sub-network, the TSN-aware MPLS
(DetNet) node has a TSN-aware Talker/Listener role, so TSN specific TSN-specific
management and control plane functionalities must be implemented.
There are many similarities in the management plane techniques used
in DetNet and TSN, but that is not the case for the control plane
protocols. For example, RSVP-TE and MSRP (Multiple the Multiple Stream Registration Protocol) behaves
Protocol (MSRP) behave differently. Therefore Therefore, management and
control plane design is an are important aspect aspects of scenarios, scenarios where mapping
between DetNet and TSN is required.

In order to use a TSN sub-network between DetNet nodes, DetNet DetNet-
specific information must be converted to TSN sub-network information specific
ones. to the
TSN sub-network. DetNet flow ID and flow related parameters/requirements flow-related parameters/
requirements must be converted to a TSN Stream ID and stream related parameters/
requirements. stream-related
parameters/requirements. Note that, as the TSN sub-network is just a
portion of the end-2-end end-to-end DetNet path (i.e., a single hop from the
MPLS perspective), some parameters (e.g., delay) may differ
significantly. Other parameters (like bandwidth) also may have to be
tuned due to the L2 encapsulation used within the TSN sub-network.

In some cases cases, it may be challenging to determine some TSN Stream TSN-Stream-
related information. For example, on a TSN-aware MPLS (DetNet) node
that acts as a Talker, it is quite obvious which DetNet node is the
Listener of the mapped TSN stream Stream (i.e., the MPLS Next-Hop). However next hop).
However, it may be not trivial to locate the point/interface where
that Listener is connected to the TSN sub-network. Such attributes
may require interaction between control and management plane
functions and between DetNet and TSN domains.

Mapping between DetNet flow identifiers and TSN Stream identifiers,
if not provided explicitly, can be done by a TSN-aware MPLS (DetNet)
node locally based on information provided for configuration of the
TSN Stream identification functions (Mask-and-match (Mask-and-Match Stream
identification and Active active Stream identification function). identification).

Triggering the setup/modification of a TSN Stream in the TSN sub-
network is an example where management and/or control plane
interactions are required between the DetNet and TSN sub-network.
TSN-unaware MPLS (DetNet) nodes make such a triggering even more
complicated as they are fully unaware of the sub-network and run
independently.

Configuration of TSN specific TSN-specific functions (e.g., FRER) inside the TSN
sub-network is a TSN domain specific TSN-domain-specific decision and may not be visible
in the DetNet domain. Service protection interworking scenarios are
left for further study.

6. Security Considerations

Security considerations for DetNet are described in detail in
[I-D.ietf-detnet-security].
[DETNET-SECURITY]. General security considerations are described in
[RFC8655]. Considerations specific to the DetNet MPLS data plane specific
considerations are
summarized in [RFC8964]. This section considers exclusively security
considerations which that are specific to the DetNet MPLS over TSN sub-network sub-
network scenario.

The sub-network between DetNet nodes needs to be subject to
appropriate confidentiality. Additionally, knowledge of what DetNet/
TSN services are provided by a sub-network may supply information
that can be used in a variety of security attacks. The ability to
modify information exchanges between connected DetNet nodes may
result in bogus operations. Therefore, it is important that the
interface between DetNet nodes and the TSN sub-network are subject to
authorization, authentication, and encryption.

The TSN sub-network operates at Layer-2 Layer 2, so various security
mechanisms defined by IEEE can be used to secure the connection
between the DetNet nodes (e.g., encryption may be provided using
MACSec
MACsec [IEEE802.1AE-2018]).

7. IANA Considerations

This document makes has no IANA requests. actions.

8. Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Norman Finn, Lou Berger, Craig Gunther,
Christophe Mangin and Jouni Korhonen for their various contributions
to this work.

9. References

9.1.

8.1. Normative References

[IEEE8021CB]
IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks--Frame Replication and Elimination for
Reliability", IEEE 802.1, "Standard Std 802.1CB-2017,
DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2017.8091139, October 2017,
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8091139>.

[IEEEP8021CBdb]
IEEE, "Draft Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks - -— Frame Replication and Elimination for
Reliability (IEEE Std 802.1CB-2017)", 2017,
<http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/>.

[IEEEP8021CBdb]
Mangin, C., "Extended -— Amendment: Extended Stream identification functions", Identification
Functions", IEEE P802.1CBdb /D1.0 P802.1CBdb, September 2020,
<http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/private/db-drafts/d1/802-
1CBdb-d1-0.pdf>. / D1.3, April 2021,
<https://1.ieee802.org/tsn/802-1cbdb/>.

[RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol
Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3031, January 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3031>.

[RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,
"Deterministic Networking Architecture", RFC 8655,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8655, October 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8655>.

[RFC8964] Varga, B., Ed., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Malis, A., Bryant,
S., and J. Korhonen, "Deterministic Networking (DetNet)
Data Plane: MPLS", RFC 8964, DOI 10.17487/RFC8964, January
2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8964>.

9.2.

8.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-detnet-security]

[DETNET-SECURITY]
Grossman, E., Mizrahi, T., and A. J. Hacker,
"Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Security
Considerations", draft-ietf-
detnet-security-13 (work Work in progress), December 2020. Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
ietf-detnet-security-16, 2 March 2021,
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-detnet-security-
16>.

[IEEE802.1AE-2018]
IEEE Standards Association,
IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks-Media Access Control (MAC) Security", IEEE Std 802.1AE-2018 MAC
Security (MACsec)",
802.1AE-2018, DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2018.8585421, December
2018, <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8585421>.

[IEEE8021Q]
IEEE 802.1, "Standard
IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks--Bridges and Bridged Networks (IEEE Networks", IEEE Std 802.1Q-
2018)",
2018, <http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/>. DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2018.8403927, July 2018,
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8403927/>.

[IEEEP8021CBcv]
Kehrer, S., "FRER
IEEE 802.1, "Draft Standard for Local and metropolitan
area networks -- Frame Replication and Elimination for
Reliability -- Amendment: Information Model, YANG Data
Model and Management Information Base Module", IEEE P802.1CBcv
/D0.4
P802.1CBcv, August 2020,
<https://www.ieee802.org/1/files/private/cv-drafts/d0/802-
1CBcv-d0-4.pdf>. Draft 1.1, February 2021,
<https://1.ieee802.org/tsn/802-1cbcv/>.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Norman Finn, Lou Berger, Craig Gunther,
Christophe Mangin, and Jouni Korhonen for their various contributions
to this work.

Authors' Addresses

Balazs

Balázs Varga (editor)
Ericsson
Budapest
Magyar Tudosok krt. 11.
Budapest
1117
Hungary

Email: balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com

Janos

János Farkas
Ericsson
Budapest
Magyar Tudosok krt. 11.
Budapest
1117
Hungary

Email: janos.farkas@ericsson.com

Andrew G. Malis
Malis Consulting

Email: agmalis@gmail.com

Stewart Bryant
Futurewei Technologies

Email: stewart.bryant@gmail.com sb@stewartbryant.com