... | ... | @@ -328,10 +328,25 @@ bridges will have to be time aware, so will probably syntonize to |
|
|
grandmaster's frequency using Sync Messages and will need to synchronize
|
|
|
to grandmaster, like WR (AVBg1 bridges are transparent and syntonize
|
|
|
optionally). The efforts to support network redundancy and speed-up
|
|
|
reconfiguration seem to be inline in WR and AVB.
|
|
|
reconfiguration seem to be inline in WR and AVB. (**ToFinish**)
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Reliability
|
|
|
|
|
|
- optional network redundancy
|
|
|
- the bases of seamless redundancy is Forward Error Correction (FEC) -
|
|
|
critical data sent over WR network is encoded into several frames
|
|
|
(i.e. 4), only subset of the frames (i.e. 2) is needed by the
|
|
|
receiver (AVB's Listener) to recover the original critical data.
|
|
|
- this allows to use dynamic network redundancy (e.g. enhanced
|
|
|
RSTP) as long as the reconfiguration time is predictable and
|
|
|
sufficiently small (i.e. so that maximum 2 frames are lost
|
|
|
during reconfiguration)
|
|
|
- two ideas are considered:
|
|
|
- enhanced (HW-supported) Spanning Tree Protocol which allows
|
|
|
fast enough reconfiguration
|
|
|
- enhanced Link Aggregation which enables to send frames which
|
|
|
constitute the critical data through independent paths
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Latency:
|
|
|
|
|
|
- preemption
|
... | ... | |