Hi Chris,

Thanks for the comments, but no the planes (as Clients) do not do BGP;
only the ground-domain Servers and Relays do BGP.

Servers are ASBRs for stub ASes  and connect to Relays that are ASBRs for
a core AS in a hub-and-spokes fashion. When a plane contacts a Server,
it becomes part of that Server’s stub AS. And, because planes do not
move rapidly from Server to Server, the amount of mobility-related BGP
update churn as seen by the core AS is dampened.

But, the planes themselves do not participate in BGP, and are therefore
not mobile ASes.

Thanks - Fred

From: Christopher Morrow [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 12:31 PM
To: Templin, Fred L <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; Saccone, Gregory T <[email protected]>; Gaurav 
Dawra <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [GROW] A Simple BGP-based Mobile Routing System for the 
Aeronautical Telecommunications Network

(as a normal participant)

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:14 PM, Templin, Fred L 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello,

We have published a document that proposes BGP as the core of a mobile routing
service for worldwide civil aviation in the Aeronautical Telecommunications 
Network
with Internet Protocol Services (ATN/IPS). This would be an overlay network 
deployment
of standard BGP with ASes arranged in such a way as to mitigate the 
mobility-related
instability that was inherent in past approaches. The system also leverages an
adjunct route optimization service known as AERO.

The ATN/IPS is planned to eventually replace existing air traffic management 
services
with an IPv6-based service as part of a long-term evolution. The choice of 
mobile
routing services is being made now, with this approach, LISP and Mobile IPv6 as
candidates. Although the decision is being considered in the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO), we feel the time is right to socialize the effort
in the IETF.

Hey, much of this document reads like:
   "hey, the global internet is messy, and slowish, we think making our own bgp 
domain will make that problem go away"

Followed by what smells a lot like any old RFC2547 MPLS VPN deployment. I'm not 
sure I buy the need for 'ip mobility' in a world where the plane COULD be a BGP 
speaker and just negotiate upstream connectivity 'in real time'... but overall 
this just sounds like  any other 2547 deployment to me?

You'd have to convince your constituent parts that depending upon various 
providers 2547 interconnection agreements to work out properly is 
sane/useful/cost-effective/not-prone-to-explosion... but ... sure, make a 2547 
network, make the planes do bgp, and orchestrate the add/remove peerings part 
across the network as planes move around.
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to