Hi Job, What this document is about is a global routing service for a major international enterprise, namely worldwide civil aviation. But, the same model could be applied to any major enterprise, e.g., large corporate enterprise networks, stock exchanges, etc. The contribution of this architecture is allowing scalable growth for new usage models where mobility, multi-homing and traffic engineering become important components of the services offered to end users. But, by virtue of this design, the Internet core BGP routing system only needs to know about a few short and unchanging prefixes - it does not need to know about the more-specific prefixes of mobile, multi-homed and traffic engineering-capable end systems.
So, instead of looking at this as an isolated case of just civil aviation, another viewpoint could see it as a model for how to grow the Internet in the coming age of mobile devices that get IPv6 prefixes that need to remain constant as the device moves around. Such that growth at the edges does not result in growth in the core. That would be aligned with grow, wouldn't it? Thanks - Fred > -----Original Message----- > From: Job Snijders [mailto:j...@ntt.net] > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 3:24 AM > To: Templin, Fred L <fred.l.temp...@boeing.com> > Cc: Christopher Morrow <christopher.mor...@gmail.com>; grow@ietf.org; > Saccone, Gregory T <gregory.t.sacc...@boeing.com>; > Gaurav Dawra <gdawra.i...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [GROW] A Simple BGP-based Mobile Routing System for the > Aeronautical Telecommunications Network > > Hi Fred, > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 06:19:09PM +0000, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > Is there interest in having a presentation about this in London next > > week? > > ### Speaking as a working group participant. > > I'm not sure this is work that is a great fit for GROW. Since the work > appears to be about a private airplane control traffic network operating > as an overlay, I'd liken the work more to SCADA related work than > Internet related projects. The fact that these planes fly around the > world (global), and BGP is used (routing), doesn't necessarily make it a > GROW item. You've indicated that ATN/IPS may not even be using the > Internet as underlay. > > I've given some thought to what would maybe be better working group. > And, in all seriousness, I think the Internet-Of-Things side of IETF may > be better. It is perhaps unconventional to liken a large item such as an > airplane to what we often consider "Things" in the IoT-context such as > mediaplayers, light bulbs, etc - but given the constraints you mentioned > in your emails (BGP is too much protocol overhead etc) the airplanes > really seems just "very large things" in IoT context. > > Have you considered one of the following groups? > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/rg/t2trg/about/ ('low-resource > nodes ("things", "constrained nodes") can communicate among > themselves and with the wider Internet') > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/detnet/about/ ('engine control > systems, and other general industrial and vehicular applications') > > I don't have access to a lot of airplanes, so I think it would be hard > for me to contribute in a meaningful way. > > ### (with co-chair hat on) > > If GROW participants are interested in draft-templin-atn-bgp-06.txt, > please speak up now. If there is interest, we'll try to make it fit in > the IETF 101 agenda. > > Kind regards, > > Job _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
