►
From YouTube: IETF103-QIRG-20181108-1120
Description
QIRG meeting session at IETF103
2018/11/08 1120
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/103/proceedings/
A
All
right
good
morning,
it's
11:20,
which
I
think
is
actually
starting
time-
welcome
to
the
first
actual
face-to-face
meeting
of
the
quantum
internet,
research
group
and
I
am
rod
van
Meter
I
am
one
of
the
co-chairs
of
the
group.
I
know
many
of
you
are
in
the
room,
but
many
of
you
I
don't
on.
So
please
introduce
yourselves
when
you
get
a
chance.
The
blue
sheets
are
making
their
way
around
the
room
and
we
have
both
a
jabber
scribe
and
a
note-taker
I
believe
so
I
think
we're
in
good
shape
there.
Okay.
A
So
I'm
I
am
one
of
the
co-chairs.
The
other
co-chair
is
a
Stephanie
Vayner
who
is
not
with
us
here
today,
but
will
be
working
with
her
and
we
have
in
her
stead
some
of
some
of
the
people
from
her
group
or
with
us
here.
So
the
idea
for
this
actually
Stephanie
was
the
one
who
originated
it.
She
sent
me
mail
and
I
believe
at
the
end
of
January
this
year
and
said
we
should
consider
having
a
quantum
internet
research
group
inside
of
our
IR
TF
and
I
contacted
Allison,
and
she
said
yeah.
A
That
sounds
like
a
great
idea,
so
I
presented
remotely
at
the
IRT
F
open
session
in
March
of
this
year.
The
time
timeline
was
a
little
too
short
for
me
to
get
there
in
person.
The
mailing
list
was
also
opened
in
March.
It's
active
and
running
the
the
volume
of
traffic
on
and
I
would
characterize
as
low
to
moderate
the.
So
it
will
not
overload
you
and,
as
I
said,
we
were
apparently
approved
as
a
RG
on
the
6th.
A
So
today's
agenda,
this
sort
of
administrative,
it's
trivia,
stuff,
just
up
for
the
first
five
minutes,
then
we're
going
to
have
a
an
introductory
talk
on
the
quantum
Internet
by
Axel
Dahlberg,
who
comes
from
tu
Delft
and
then
Axl
will
also
have
the
responsibility
of
presenting
the
very
first
internet
draft
for
the
Qi
RG
work,
which
is
actually
on
advertising.
Entanglement
capabilities.
B
What
applications
we
can
we
can
perform
in
each
stage,
but
before
I
do
this
I
want
to
give
a
brief
overview
of
what
is
the
quantum
internet
them
and
what
can
we
do
at
it
and
just
to
get
a
feeling
for
who's
in
the
room?
I
wanted
to
see
maybe
a
raise
of
hands.
For
example,
who
knows
what
entanglement
is.
B
B
The
reason
for
this
is
that
a
quantum
Internet
allows
to
do
many
cool,
which
are
not
possible
in
what
we
call
the
classical
Internet's
or
the
normal
internet,
and
these
things
are,
for
example,
the
most
famous
one
is
quantum
key
distribution
where
you
can
distribute
keys
using
using
quantum
mechanics
and
then
use
this
to
do
secure
communication
over
the
standard
internet.
There
are
also
many
other
things:
I
can
do
secure
identification.
B
So
this
sounds
great,
very
cool,
so
why
don't?
We
have
a
quantum
Internet
already.
If
we
cannot
do
all
these
things,
it
turns
out
that
building
such
Network
is
very
hard,
both
from
the
point
of
view
of
developing
the
actual
hardware
to
to
able
to
do
all
these
things,
but
also
from
a
software
perspective
to
develop
all
the
Institute
infrastructure.
B
We
need
to
run
protocol
sense
to
control
this
network
and
in
qtek
we
have
a
lot
of
people
working
on
all
these
different
levels,
both
in
the
experimental
side
and
both
from
the
software
side,
and
we're
currently
now
also
part
of
the
quantum
internet
alliance
in
Europe,
which
is
a
collaboration
between
many
companies
and
institutes
to
actually
achieve
this,
and
you
might
think
that
why
are
we
already
talking
about
the
quantum
internet?
We
don't
even
have
quantum
computers
yet,
but
counterintuitive
as
it
might
seem,
a
quantum
internet
might
be
easier
than
building
a
quantum
computer.
B
B
You
don't
require
so
many
qubits
per
node
as,
for
example,
for
quantum
key
distribution,
and
this
is
because
these
applications,
the
security,
are
guaranteed
by
property
in
quantum
mechanics,
which
is
called
entanglement,
so
entanglement
test
is
a
concept
that
have
confused
many
people,
for
example,
Einstein
called
it
spooky
at
the
time.
However,
since
then,
we've
gone
quite
far
in
understanding,
entanglements
and
their
effect
to
creep
key
properties
of
entanglement,
which,
if
you
understand
these
gets
you
quite
far
in
understanding,
why
entanglement
is
it's
useful
for
applications
in
a
network?
B
This
is
very
useful
for
doing
tests,
which
requires
coordination
between
parties
in
a
network.
Furthermore,
one
can
prove
formally
in
do
to
quantum
mechanics.
That
segment
is
inherently
private,
which
means
that
no
one
else
can
have
a
share
in
maximal
entanglements
between
parties
or
in
other
words,
no
one
can
essentially
eavesdrop
on
this
correlations
that
is
being
produced,
which
is
perfectly
suitable
for,
for
example,
key
distribution
and.
B
B
This
is
not
only
a
challenge
in
terms
of
developing
the
hardware
that
is
needed,
but
it's
also
challenging
developing
the
software
example.
To
achieve
this,
one
thing
that
we
need
to
develop
is
a
network
stack
for
a
quantum
network
which,
as
you
many
of
you,
probably
know
that
this
is
a
highly
non-trivial
task
and
we.
E
B
Okay,
so
the
first
stage
in
in
a
content
network
is
actually
the
current
status
of
of
this
field
what's
been
implemented
in
reality,
and
we
we
call
this
the
trusted
repeaters
and
you
know
trusted
repeater
network.
One
can
essentially
through
the
links
the
physical
links
between
the
nodes
produce
key
using
quantum
key
distribution.
B
However,
why
this
is
called
trusted?
Repeater
is
because,
if
two
nodes
that
are
not
physically
connected
want
to
communicate
using
this
key,
they
of
course
need
to
trust
the
middle
node
through
using
both
of
these
pairs
of
keys.
This
is
why
it's
called
trusted
repeater-
and
this
is
this
stage-
is
slightly
different
from
the
other
stages,
because
it
doesn't
actually
effectively
allow
for
any
quantum
communication
between
the
nodes.
B
The
next
step
is
called
a
prepare
measure
network,
where
essentially,
a
node
can
prepare
a
qubit
state
and
send
it
to
another
node
which
can
perform
a
measurements.
This
then
actually
allows
to
do
quantum
key
distribution
between
any
pair
of
nodes
in
the
network,
even
if
they
are
not
directly
connected,
and
it
also
allows
for
other
applications
such
as
secure
identification.
B
B
B
And
then
going
up
further
I
guess
also
further
in
the
future.
One
can
envision
that
each
node
can
have
a
few
fault
tolerance
qubits,
which
means
that
you
can
essentially
by
adding
more
qubits
or
making
them
a
logical
qubit
by
encoding
them
using
air
pressure.
You
can
reduce
the
noise
you
apply
when
you
do
gates
indefinitely
our
the
number
of
logical
qubits
you
have
at
this
stage,
it's
still
possible
to
simulate
classically.
E
F
F
So
you
know
you
said
you
started
out
by
saying
you
want
a
quantum
network,
but
it
seems
to
me
that
a
you
know
if
you
network
quantum
computers
and
use
it
using
conventional
technologies,
is
there
any
value
to
that?
That
might
be
something
that
is,
you
know,
rapidly
achievable
and
will
have
some
some.
F
A
I'll,
take
I'll,
take
chairs
prerogative
there
and
stick
in
what
one
comment.
Actually
there
is
a
a
proof
that
if
you
just
take
two
classical
computers
of
a
certain
size
and
connect
them
together
with
it
with
it
with
only
a
classical
channel,
you
get
no
net
improvement
in
the
computational
capability
over
just
having
the
two
individual
quantum
computers.
E
B
B
How
you
distill,
let's
say
whiskey,
so
you
can
improve
the
entanglement,
even
though
you
start
off
with
a
with
a
noise
entanglement,
but
then
there's,
of
course,
the
question
of
decoherence.
So
if
you
want
to
store
the
entanglement,
quantum
memories
are
inherently
noisy.
So
this
you
of
course
need
to
overcome-
and
this
is
also
part
of
this
fifth
stage
where
you
can
do
gates
in
a
fault-tolerant
manner.
So
it's
a
very
important
question,
but
I
don't
have
time
to
fully.
A
Alright,
with
that,
let's
go
on
to
the
the
next
actual
presentation,
this
the
is
the
first
internet
draft
out
of
qi
RG
and
the
first
author
of
this
QED
actually
was
here
earlier
this
week,
but
couldn't
stay
for
thursday,
and
I
couldn't
get
here
any
earlier,
so
he
asked
axel
to
take
on
the
process
of
explaining
this
one.
Yet.
B
So
distress
concerns
advertising,
entanglement
capabilities,
for
example,
as
you
mentioned,
how
much
decoherence
you
have
when
you
try
to
generate
entanglement,
and
this
idea
came
up
in
a
in
a
hackathon.
We
organized
three
or
four
weeks
ago
on
the
quantum
internet,
and
this
was
the
core
idea-
was
originated
from
karate
Melkor
from
juniper
and
Stephanie
Rayner.
B
So
I've
already
mentioned
some
brief
things
about
entitlement.
So
I
don't
need
to
say
this
again,
but
I
should
maybe
say
that
one
might
ask
what
does
good
entanglement
mean
or
what
does
bad
entanglement
mean
and
one
can
quantify
how
noise
entanglement
is
in?
What's
called
the
fidelity,
it's
essentially
means
how
close
am
I
to
having
essentially
perfect
entanglement
and,
of
course
the
fidelity
will
then
decrease
when
you
have
a
coherence
and
quanta
memories.
H
B
So
essentially,
this
means
that
if,
if
you
have
maximal
entanglements
what
I
said
earlier
that,
if
you
measure
your
cupids,
you
will
always
receive
perfect
correlation
between
your
measurement
outcomes.
But
then,
if
your
state
is
not
maximally
entangled
you
don't
always
get
the
same
measurement
out
from
that.
That
is
perfect
correlations,
so
you
can
quantify
how
noisy
or
your
status
by
checking
on
how
many
times
do
I
don't
get
my
expected
measurement
outcome.
H
No,
it's
a
it's
a
clarification
question
yeah.
Can
you
just
say
if
you
change
the
state
of
a
qubit
in
one
spot
and
if
it's
Table,
two
cubed
somewhere
else
with
no
physical
medium
between
it
other
than
space,
the
state
will
change.
So
if
I
set
a
one
bits
in
the
cubed
here,
it'll
be
one
over
there.
Is
that
a
true
or
false
statement?
So.
B
B
B
B
B
This
is
a
not
a
trivial
question.
To
answer
because,
for
example,
we
might
be
able
to
generate
entanglement
faster
here,
but
we
might
be
able
to
generate
less
noisy
entanglement
in
this
direction
and,
as
I
mentioned,
one
can
also
do
distillation,
so
one
can
produce
two
entangled
pairs
here,
distill
them
to
make
a
better
pair.
B
So
this
complicates
the
question
of:
should
we
go
up
or
should
we
go
below
so
in
this
proposal?
We
don't
answer
how
to
answer
this
question.
We
only
want
to
answer
how
should
we
advertise
the
capabilities
of
the
links
such
that
a
decision
could
be
made
with
some
art
wouldn't
and
the
feature
sets
sort
of
are
important
to
note
to
make
a
such
a
decision
is,
for
example,
of
course,
what's
the
topology
of
the
of
the
network
itself?
What
are
the
possible
paths?
What
are
the
capabilities
of
each
node?
B
B
So
the
proposal
of
this
raft
is
to
use
essentially
run
a
link
state
protocol
to
advertise
these
these
capabilities
of
the
links
and
add
each
of
these.
These
properties
of
the
links
as
theories
to
the
link
state
protocol
and
then
each
to
each
control.
Node
learns
all
the
capabilities
of
the
links
in
the
network
and
can
then
possibly
make
decisions
of
which
path
to
take.
B
So
to
describe
there's
a
lot
of
steps
to
still
be
taken
so
from
Q
Tech,
we're
sort
of
biased
towards
a
specific
implementation
of
ricotta
Network
using
nitrogen
vacancy
sensors
in
diamonds.
But
it's
also
good
to
know.
Does
this
proposal
also
make
sense
for
people
that
use
other
implementations
such
as
fatty,
ions
or
neutral
atoms,
or
something
else,
and
we
also
want
to
put
a
short
document
on
archive
to
explain
a
bit
more
about
the
actual
theory.
A
F
Falk
has
a
former
iron
TF
chair
since
Allison's.
Not
here
I
can
advise
you
that
has
the
chair
of
the
research
group.
You
can
run
it
in
any
way
you
see
fit.
If
you
want
people
to
show
up
and
participate,
I
suggest
that
you
try
not
to
annoy
too
many
people
in
the
room.
So
you
might
want
to
consider
that
when
you
make
your
decisions,
but
this
isn't
an
IDF
Working
Group,
you
don't
need
to
run
a
consensus
process
and
so
I
suggest
that
you
do
choose
a
process.
F
A
A
H
So
Aaron
asked
the
question:
is
there
any
value
to
run
two
quantum
computers
through
a
classical
network,
and
you
said
there
was
no
value
at
so
to
move
these
properties,
we
would
need
this
classical
network,
so
it
sounds
like
this
is
getting.
This
is
too
far
ahead
of
the
game.
We
need
to
understand
more
fundamentals
before
we
say
how
to
do
things
right.
That's
my
gut
reaction
to
this
proposal.
H
B
H
I
I
Alistair
Woodman
net
deaf,
the
I,
think
you've
work
trapped
in
a
corner
case
of
looking
at
quantum
computing
for
contemn
networking
for
quantum
computing,
which
is
a
I
think
a
corner
case
question
the
more
interesting
question
which
I
don't
think
anybody
clearly
articulated
is
what
are
the
practical
uses
of
quantum
networking
for
non
quantum
computers?
Is
there
any
value
to
anybody
to
be
able
to
talk
about
key
distribution
on
yeah,
faster
throughput?
I
There's
a
whole
bunch
of
things
out
there
that
people
are
excited
about
which
may
get
people
here
in
this
room
interested
in
what
you're
doing
with
out
the
corner
case
thing
and
making
both
quantum
computing
and
quantum
networking
work,
which
is
probably
fifty
years
away
or
wherever
that
is
right,
but
but
there
may
be
sure
to
turn
practical
and
interesting
and
I
think
you're
ducking
they.
What
would
I
do
with
quantum
networking
with
existing
computer
stuff
where's
the.
B
A
Qkd
is
the
obvious
example,
the
quantum
key
distribution
that
already
exists.
It's
it's
an
application
for
our
classical
communications
that
uses
sort
of
a
minimal
set
of
capabilities
in
in
the
quantum
world
and
so
part
of
the
work
item.
That's
that's
on
the
agenda
is
to
figure
out
that
full
set
of
steps
that
go
the
applications
that
go
with
the
the
stages
that
Axl
presented
so
to
go
from
there.
E
Even
risking
hallway
I
think
the
proposal
is
very
similar
to
proposal
of
heaven,
for
example,
a
control
plane
that
controls
a
optical
network.
Okay.
So
in
this
case
we
have
a
control
plane
which
have
normal
communication
between
the
nodes,
which
basically
autodiscover
the
poor
of
the
quantum
links,
for
example.
How
many
qubits
you
can
have
her?
B
B
E
This
is
a
the
same
way
as
we,
for
example,
control
obstacle
trail
right.
It's
it's
not
really
like
a
normal
communication,
it's
just
data
plane
of
in
optics,
but
we
do
exchange
information
like
routing
information
about
the
capability
of
optical
links,
so
we
could
produce
a
enter
an
optical
trail
with
certain
characteristics
along
the
trail.
C
I'm
a
little
bit,
you
know
confused
with
this
request
and
essentially
and
then
this
draft
I'm
trying
to
think
about.
But
one
thing
which
is
much
more
interesting
thing
to
me,
is
how
to
carry
more
information
in
a
single
photon
over
the
network,
because
this
could
vastly
improve
the
capacity
that
we
need.
And
probably
you
know
it
sounds
crazy,
but
you
know
it
could
end
up
being
cheaper
than
how
we
are
doing
the
optical
networks
today.
C
So
that's
one
area
that
you
know
our
occasional
read
upon
and
is-
and
it's
quite
interesting
so
using
classical
networks
to
distribute
information
whatever
that
information
is
I,
mean
we've
been
we've
been
doing
that
and
I
I
mean
I
I
fail
to
see
here,
I
mean
there
are
some
problems,
but
I
don't
understand
it,
but
I
said
that's
one
of
the
areas.
That
would
be
very
interesting
to
me.
J
Robert
Gruber
here
one
suggestion
right
just
to
get
everybody
operate,
would
you
might
want
to
use
qkd
as
an
example
with
trusted
notes,
the
way
things
are
done
today
and
untrusted
notes
and
and
that
might
educate
people
in
a
fairly
simple
way.
You
know
how
you
know
the
simplest
thing
that
you
could
do
what
the
quantum
network
great.
As
a
comparison
you
mean
yeah.
A
J
Because
it's
you
know,
the
issue
of
using
you
know
eyes
is
or
tell
these
to
explain,
fidelity's
and
things
like
that.
We
already
have
that
concept
right
for
you
know
best
path,
and
things
like
that
right.
So
using
this
in
the
quantum
space
is
pretty
simple,
but
people
are
having
a
hard
time
understanding
why
you
mean.
J
A
J
A
A
A
K
Guys
office
of
the
droves,
so
I
think
we
might
need
to
be
more
clear
on
what
the
objective
is
we
want
to
get
to.
So
we
were.
Our
intention
is
to
distribute
data
and
information.
We
need
in
order
to
form
the
entanglements
right.
So
the
end
points
need
a
way
to
communicate
with
each
other
and
to
distribute
the
information.
They
would
need
to
build
that
entanglement.
K
A
A
A
A
A
A
Although
you
didn't
talk
about
it
today,
but
there
are
also
a
set
of
other
problems,
including
the
the
applications
for
a
quantum
internet
which
we,
which
is
already
been
brought
up
here,
a
couple
of
times
figuring
out
how
to
take
that
set
of
six
stages
that
Vayner
and
company
have
proposed
and
figure
out
what
applications.
Each
of
those
will
do
with
relatively
concrete
use
cases
for
each
one,
I
think
is
one
of
the
big
items
for
the
entire
community,
not
just
for
a
handful
of
people
here
and
there
and
then
a
little
farther
away.
A
There
have
already
been
people
who
have
been
working
on
how
to
build,
not
just
the
entanglement
between
two
nodes,
but
about
how
to
make
use
of
larger
entangled
states
that
cover
multiple
systems,
and
so
that
can
be
something
that's
farther
on
down
the
line
for
outputs
and
milestones
to
concrete
suggestions
that
I
had
our
first,
an
architectural
framework
that
delineates
the
types
of
nodes.
One
of
the
figures
that
Axl
put
up
there
he
mentioned
repeater
and
I,
think
there
was
switch
and
there
was
n
node
on
the
the
list.
A
Is
that
a
complete
taxonomy
of
the
types
of
nodes
that
we
have?
This
I
think
has
been
brought
up
before
that
we
need
some
sort
of
shared
common
vocabulary
in
order
to
move
forward
in
order
to
actually
take
steps
toward
a
a
complete
network
architecture.
So
I
think
that
plus
working
on
these,
this
set
of
concrete
use
cases
Plus
that
you
know
now.
A
The
third
item
also
that
of
the
this
draft
for
routing
that
Caridi
actually
wrote
I,
think
that
gives
us
a
solid
first
three
items
on
our
work
agenda
here
and,
as
I
said
in
the
introductory
comments,
I
think
the
plan
is
to
meet
once
a
year
here
at
IETF,
IRT
F
once
a
year
at
a
quantum
conference
and
once
a
year
online,
so
I
want
to
open
the
floor
up
to
comments
on
this
craft
charter.
So
far
you
know
this
is
essentially
first
light
for
this
charter.
A
F
Erin
Faulk,
so
one
of
the
questions
I
think
that
you
have
to
ask
when
you're,
creating
a
new
research
group
is,
you
know,
does
the
existence
of
the
research
group?
Is
it
going
to
bring
in
the
right
communities
that
you
want
to
collaborate
just
judging
by
the
number
of
people
in
the
room,
you've
gotten
the
attention
inside
the
IETF
I'm.
A
F
A
F
Probably
close
to
a
hundred
and
but
but
I
guess,
a
question
that
I
have
is
like
this
there's
a
lot
of
the
topics
that
you've
got
here
rely
on
to
me
and
expertise
that
is
not
sort
of
the
core,
IETF
expertise,
and
so
are
you
gonna
be
able
to
get
those
people
in
the
room?
Have
they
already
shown
interest?
You
know,
I
I,
don't
know
enough
to
recognize.
You
know
the
individual
names
so
I'm,
just
sort
of
asking
this
of
you
yeah.
A
The
the
physicists,
certainly
the
people
who
are
the
experimentalists
who
are
building
these
systems,
certainly
have
none
of
the
knowledge.
That's
in
this
room
and
the
question
is:
do
they
recognize
it?
Do
they
think
that
that's
important
and
are
they
willing
to
come
and
participate
in
it?
That's
that's
the
open
question
right
now
on
this.
The
EU
quantum
internet
Alliance
that
axel
presented
is
probably
the
largest
coordinated
effort
on
the
planet
at
the
moment.
So
clearly
we
need
the
involvement
of
some
some
of
those
people.
A
If
we
don't
if
this
Forks
off
from
from
what
those
folks
are
doing,
then
this
RG
will
have
no
impact
on
what
they
actually
go
right.
So
it's
absolutely
critical
that
we
have
in
some
involvement
with
them.
Axel's
a
theorist
and
a
software
guy
Stephenie
yourself
used
to
work
for
some
ISP
and
Europe
and
before
before,
moving
into
quantum,
but
the
other
key
part
of
the
Delft
group
over
there
is
actually
a
guy
named
Ronald,
Hanson
who's,
the
leading,
experimentalist
and
and
doing
and
building
these
systems
he's
talking
about.
A
So
they
sit
in
the
same
dough
like
so
at
least
on
one
key
hardware
project.
There
is
direct
collaborate,
collaboration
going
on
and
a
path
for
people
in
this
room
to
influence.
What
that
group
does
is
through
axel
and
Stephanie,
that's
sort
of
a
what
you
might
call
a
a
second
class
route
to
getting
things
done.
We
would
be
much
much
much
better
off
if
we
can
get
some
of
them
to
actually
show
up
in
person
and
actually
contribute
on
the
mailing
list,
and
so
I
think
a
key
goal
actually
is.
A
H
Hi
this
is,
you
know,
I
think
that
group
of
researchers
or
the
physicists
have
to
actually
teach
us,
because
if
we
don't
understand
underlying
properties,
then
we
don't
know
what
the
value
is.
We
can't
make
good
trade
offs
that
sort
of
thing.
So
yes,
they
have.
We
have
to
influence
each
other,
but
I
think
more
to
the
point
is
we
we
have
to
be
taught
by
the
physicists
and
we
have
to
teach
you
guys
about
networking
right.
The
same
sort
of
thing,
yeah.
A
The
I
mentioned
in
my
opening
remarks
that
the
third
workshop
for
quantum
repeaters
and
networks,
the
first
one,
was,
let's
see
so
2019
2020
15,
and
in
that
one
we
actually
started
with
a
half-day
tutorial
and
we
had
people
like
Paul
mock,
a
Patras
and
Bill
Manning
and
cavae
salamati
and
show
up
show
up
for
that.
We
would
be
totally
on
board
with
doing
that
again
any
time
any
place.
That
makes
sense.
A
L
L
So
if
there
is
anything,
I
mean,
if
you
don't
want
us
to
know,
and
we
just
want
a
routing
protocol
and
you
put
in
if
you
can
elaborate
on
exactly
what
you
need
in
the
optimizations,
you
want
the
routing
protocol
to
do.
We
can
probably
do
it,
but
if
we
understand
it
better,
we
can
probably
do
a
better
job,
but
I
think
it's
all
about
a
understood
project.
G
G
Might
be
a
bit
of
a
net,
but
if
you
scroll
down
to
the
end,
there
was
something
about
working
with
other
stos,
which
sort
of
stood.
It's
like
coordination
point
with
other
standards.
Organizations
I
mean
inviting
people
to
participate
from
a
research
perspective
is
fine.
You
don't
want
to
put
yourself
in
this
space
where
they
will
send.
You
liaison
some
expect
you
to
respond,
because
that's
not
something
that
research
groups
typically
do
and
the.
A
G
A
I
want
I
want
the
weakest
possible
word
that
would
include
this.
Maybe
the
weakest
possible
thing
is
to
actually
delete
it.
I'm,
not
sure
for
those
of
you
who
don't
know
there
is
work
going
on
both
both
the
ITU
and
I
Triple
E
have
have
started
some
efforts
around
standardization
of
quantum
networks.
Nothing,
that's
quite
that's,
looking
quite
as
far
forward
as
the
total
set
of
things
that
axel
and
talked
about
so
far.
Today,
it's
much
more
short-term.
A
I
Yes,
I,
don't
know
to
do
that:
information,
Alistair,
wood,
so
again,
I'm,
maybe
I'm
speaking
just
for
myself,
but
there's
a
limit
physicist,
so
I
might
be
a
slight
disadvantage,
but
but
you're
not
doing
a
good
job
of
sort
of
articulating.
We
saw
the
roadmap
think
what
we
didn't
see:
I'm
sure
there's
a
bunch
of
people
in
here,
and
we
heard
from
one
speaker
already
that
what
I
know
when
we're
gonna
get
more
bandwidth
than
we
had
before.
I
There
are
some
people
here
in
the
room
who
want
things
to
happen
instantaneously
across
the
planet,
right
and
and
there's
no
clear
statement
about
when
you
think
those
things
may
happen
from
a
temporal
standpoint
in
our
world
right
at
the
moment,
I'm
guessing
you're
gonna
be
talking
about.
You
know:
9600
board
communications,
the
next
five
years.
Maybe
it
would
be
good
idea
to
tell
everybody
that,
because
maybe
a
lot
of
people
would
just
go.
Oh
thank
you.
I
can
move
on
right,
so
there's
a
specific
set
of
things.
I
You're
you're
looking
to
get
skill
sets
in
right.
Maybe
the
socket
stuff
is
a
good
area
and
all
those
other
there's
a
whole
bunch
of
people
here
turned
up
to
understand.
What's
going
on,
and
maybe
we
do
need
a
full.
You
know
a
half
day
to
talk
about
that,
but
there's
I
think
there's
a
very
highest
level.
There's
no
clear
understanding
about
when's
this
going
to
inflect
in
in
what
particular
applications
does
anybody
expect
this
to
inflect
all.
I
Mass
interestedly
useful
for
people
or
do
you
need
people
to
build
boxes?
What
do
you
need
right?
Because
I
think
we've
got
very
disparate
skill,
sets
here
and
I'm
guessing
you
can
use
10
to
20%
of
the
people
here
and
the
other
80%
of
the
people
are
just
trying
to
figure
out
and
they
will
figure
out
some
point
that
this
is
not
their
space
for
the
next
10.
A
But
for
these
entangled
networks,
the
people
who
are
doing
this-
the
group
in
Delft
that's
doing
this
over
two
kilometers
of
fiber
on
the
Delft
campus.
Their
data
rates
for
doing
this
are
creating
six
entangled
states
per
second.
Is
that
great,
oh
they're,
up
to
13?
Oh
sorry,
that's
right!
In
fact,
Ronald
told
me
that
when
I
saw
them
recently,
they're
up
to
30
entangled
entangled
states
per
second
on
this.
So
the
point
in
doing
this
is
not
being
with
write.
A
A
any
sort
of
thought
of
that
needs
to
just
you'll
walk
right
out
the
room
right
now
right
now.
The
point
in
doing
this
is
with
those
entangled
states.
You
can
do
certain
things
in
new
ways
that
that
circumvent
that
need
for
more
bandwidth
or
more
or
fewer
rounds
of
communication,
in
particular,
as
well
as
one
common
one.
So
I
divide
the
the
applications
up
into
essentially
three
areas:
they're
sort
of
similar
to
axel
talked
about
ones
distributed
computing,
which
is
relatively
straightforward,
and
we
talked
about
that.
A
The
second
one
is
cryptographic
protocols
which
includes
qkd,
and
the
point
of
qkd
is
not
to
generate
keys
faster
than
you
can
make.
Then
you
can
do
them
with
diffie-hellman
it's
to
get
new
security
capabilities
that
you
don't
have
in
existing
software
systems
and
similarly
with
quantum
Byzantine
agreement,
which
would
also
be
in
the
same
area.
In
theory,
it's
going
to
give
us
better
security
properties
than
existing
cryptographic
based
Byzantine
agreement
protocols.
Whether
or
not
that's
really
true
in
practice.
A
I
think
is
very
much
an
open
question
and
he
needs
further
discussion
and
then
the
third
area,
which
axel
also
mentioned,
is
that
these
can
actually
be
used
to
enhance
the
precision
of
sensor
networks,
including
things
like
interferometry
between
large
radio,
telescopes
or
large
optical
telescopes,
for
example.
So
in
those
three
areas-
but
none
of
this
is
about
bandwidth-
we're
not
going
to
be
talking
about
o
quantum
network.
So,
let's
you
go
from
from
40
gigabits
per
second
to
a
terabit
per
second
on
a
fiber.
That's
not
the
point.
Yes,
question.
E
My
name
is
Igor
Christian
and
I'm.
Specialist
obstacle,
control,
plane,
I,
have
very
limited
understanding
of
optical
data
plane,
but
still
if
we
managed
to
describe
the
optical
method
and
optical
links
and
also
optical
notes,
and
what
constitutes
good
optical
paths
and
based
on
this
knowledge,
we
could
run
a
various
optimization
algorithms
and
can
make
it
happen.
Make
optical
Osen
are
reasonable
and
the
signal,
readable
and
so
forth,
without
actually
full
understanding
what's
happening
in
the
optical
data
plane.
E
M
Stuart
Bryant
I'm
very
much
an
obvious
on
this,
but
two
observations.
First
off
the
time.
Transfer
solution
is
one
that
is
taxing
the
network
industry,
some
of
the
new
radios,
particularly
if
IP
and
presumably
what
goes
on
afterwards
have
critical
requirements
on
exact
time
transfer
that
stress
GPS
to
its
limit.
So
there's
a
major
wing
have
to
be
had
in
that,
and
time
is
not
a
high
bandwidth
thing
because
after
once
you
know
the
time,
then
you
know
you
know
it
right.
M
So
so
that's
a
really
important
area,
I
think
to
to
think
about
the
other
things
that
observed
a
paradox
in
what
was
being
described.
If
the
function
of
one
of
the
functions
of
quantum
networking
is
to
improve
the
security
of
a
network,
how
do
you
use
a
classical
network
to
connect
nodes
together,
which
is
presumably
vulnerable
to
classical
security
errors?
I,
don't
see
how
you
get
the
bootstrap
to
work
that
way
realm.
A
You've
asked
the
million
dollar
question
there
and
the
part
of
the
answer
to
that
is
that
in
fact,
some
some
of
these
security
protocols
that
depend
on
end-to-end
entanglement
allow
the
two
end
nodes
to
confirm
with
each
other
that
they
acted,
that
they
actually
believe
that
there
is
no
one
in
the
communication
channel.
But
if,
if
these,
if
that
can,
if
they're
classical
communication
can
be
disrupted
in
real
time,
including
the
breaking
of
whatever
encryption
they're
using
for
that
classical
entanglement,
yeah
you've
got
it.
You've
got
a
a
chicken-and-egg
problem
there.
It's
an
open
question.
A
Let's
see,
it
is
now
12
21
problem
people
are
probably
interested
in
lunch
I.
This
has
intrigued
all
of
you
and
we
will
work
to
have
a
half-day
session
available
in
Prague
a
tutorial
session.
Please
join
the
the
mailing
list.
There
are
reference
materials,
including
for
beginners,
available
in
the
mailing
list
archives
and,
if
anybody's,
actually
interested
Sholto,
Nagayama
who's
sitting
right
up
here
in
the
front,
is
putting
a
group
of
group
of
people
together
to
go
to
dinner
and
talk
about
this
tonight.
So
fine
show
if
you're
interested.
Thank
you
all
for
coming.