https://redmine.ucaiug.org/https://redmine.ucaiug.org/favicon.ico?15861924492021-02-03T20:34:42ZUCAIug Issue Tracking SystemIEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=72021-02-03T20:34:42ZHerbert Falk
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>Accepted</i></li></ul> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=2342021-02-15T18:42:56ZVladan Cvejic
<ul><li><strong>Subject</strong> changed from <i>• Failover at link layer – from 2ms to 2 sec.
Link Failover reliability problem –
Solution 1: need for end-end to connection or</i> to <i>Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection application</i></li><li><strong>Category</strong> set to <i>Profile or Guideline</i></li><li><strong>Discuss in Upcoming Meeting</strong> set to <i>No</i></li></ul><p>Checking done.</p> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=2562021-02-15T20:26:36ZCarlos Rodriguez del Castillo
<ul><li><strong>Discuss in Upcoming Meeting</strong> changed from <i>No</i> to <i>Yes</i></li></ul> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=3222021-02-16T10:19:36ZVladan Cvejic
<ul><li><strong>Due date</strong> set to <i>08/16/2021</i></li><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Accepted</i> to <i>Triage</i></li><li><strong>Start date</strong> set to <i>02/16/2021</i></li><li><strong>Short Proposal</strong> set to <i>H30 to provide more details.</i></li><li><strong>Discuss in Upcoming Meeting</strong> changed from <i>Yes</i> to <i>No</i></li><li><strong>To discuss in WG10</strong> set to <i>No</i></li></ul><p>H30 to provide more details.</p> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=35832021-12-21T14:55:12ZCarlos Rodriguez del Castillo
<ul></ul><p>With PRP/HSR this should not be an issue, clarify with Dustin</p> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=37062022-02-01T15:36:33ZCarlos Rodriguez del Castillo
<ul></ul><p>2 points:<br />1. Link status<br />- Link status could be reported by SNMP protocol (MIB) (IEEE 802.3.1-2013)<br />- SNMP mandatory in IEDs? It seems too hard<br />- LCCH LN? ChLiv / RedChLiv<br />- IEC 62351 is purely security related<br />- IED or switches should provide a MIB for monitoring purposes<br />- Herb will check where in the standard IEC 61850-90-4<br />- IEC 61850-90-22 Autorouting section 4.3.2<br />- IEC 61850-90-28 Comm supervision<br />2. Faiolver mechanism<br />- IEC 61850 allows HSR, PRP, RSTP as redundancy mechanism. Failover mechanism is described in 90-4.<br />- Action: Take a look on 90-4 and see if clarification is needed for failover use</p> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=37122022-02-08T08:55:26ZCarlos Rodriguez del Castillo
<ul><li><strong>To discuss in WG10</strong> changed from <i>No</i> to <i>Yes</i></li></ul><p>On the link failover topic, the ask is:<br />1. Link Monitoring: WG10 to map MIB (SNMP) to an a new attribute and make it available for monitoring – <br />• Minimum requirement is to have HEALTHY/FAIL status but it would helpful to have more detailed information. <br />• The expectation is not to make this mandatory at this time but in future<br />2. Link Failover: WG10 to include in Guide to help users understand:<br />• The options available on link monitoring<br />• Link-failover options & timelines & architectures<br />• HSR/PRP usage & monitoring</p>
<p>There are 2 topics: Link Monitoring and Linkfailover and both of them are not out of scope of 61850 as it is upto the users to decide on implementation based on their priorities. I agree that WG10 Guide can make recommendation on superior practice for PRP & HSR for GOOSE/SV applications but it does not make sense to use HSR/PRP for a metering application which is polled once every hour while link monitoring & link failover still has a use in this application.</p> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=37282022-02-09T15:13:31ZCarlos Rodriguez del Castillo
<ul><li><strong>To discuss in WG10</strong> changed from <i>Yes</i> to <i>No</i></li></ul><p>- 90-4 only mentions we should not take care about link failover because we have PRP/HSR as redundancy mechanism<br />- Topic: supervision<br /> - Use LCCH.ChLiv and RedChLiv to indicate the status of the physical channels<br /> - 90-4 models SNMP MIB to IEC 61850 LN, maybe it is not complete --> This should be a different issue in redmine<br /> - 62351-7 maps MIB to 61850<br /> - We need a detailed use case about SNMP information that needs to be mapped in IEC 61850 or with direction is needed<br /> - Confirm if we are talking about SNMP mapping to IEC 61850 data model environment<br /> - There is no request to do something with 90-4<br />- Topic: standardization<br /> - You can use link failover transparent to 61850 <br /> - It is out of the scope of the standard<br />- IEEE 802.3ad "Link Aggregtion" is not the same thing as link failover</p>
<p>Actions:<br />- If LCCH.ChLiv/RedChLiv is not enough, then we need more information from H30<br />- Maybe SNMP map to IEC61850 in 90-4 is not enough. We have to create a new issue for this in redmine an provide users information<br />- To discuss in the plenary:<br /> - 90-4 update<br /> - 90-4/3 data models to 7-4 IS (for edition 3)</p> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=47492022-10-25T13:59:22ZVladan Cvejic
<ul><li><strong>Due date</strong> changed from <i>08/16/2021</i> to <i>10/25/2022</i></li><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Triage</i> to <i>Rejected</i></li></ul> IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Support #555: Link Failover reliability problem - implication to protection applicationhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/555?journal_id=47502022-10-25T14:01:09ZVladan Cvejic
<ul></ul><p>Rejected since PRP and HSR are the standard ways to accomplish this. IEC 61850 is not providing mechanism to achieve this.<br />Application monitoring is already addressed by TF Supervision.<br />Link layer is intentionally abstract to application layer.</p>