Boeing is not the only aircraft manufacturer in the world.... -----Original Message----- From: Bound, Jim [mailto:Jim.Bound@;hp.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 12:23 PM To: Michel Py; Margaret Wasserman; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Limiting the Use of Site-Local
I simply have completely different data but will go check with friends at Boeing and be back. /jim [Have you ever seen the rain coming down on a sunny day] > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Py [mailto:michel@;arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us] > Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 12:21 PM > To: Bound, Jim; Margaret Wasserman; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Limiting the Use of Site-Local > > > [For the record, Internet access for passengers is a > completely separate system that does not connect to the > plane's systems, and here's the reason why: Imagine a bunch > of IETFers in a plane. We all have laptops. Give us an > Ethernet link to the plane, someone will hack the plane just > to pass time during a long flight. Sounds like suicide to me....] > > > Jim Bound wrote: > > here is not reason at all why what you stated could not > > be link-local addresses. I would argue if sensors do what > > I hear they will do link-locals are fine and we do have controls on > > that and they are not forwarded off the link. > > That's not the way it works. In the rather classic triple or > quintuple system redundancy, each of the devices that can > control something is on a separate bus (a separate subnet). > But it might talk to the other two or four all the time, and > they occasionally vote and might decide that one of the > devices is out of whack, things like this. So, there are > multiple links in case of cable failure or jabbering NIC or > something, but they might talk to each other. Site-local. > > > The cockpit and intra-connections could be viewed as on > link easily. > > Access to the FAA or GPA Sat-Com would require global (hmm maybe > > inter-planetary scope :--)) and as in my previous mail > those would be > > gateways to the sensors. > > But the plane itself would not be completely isolated either. > Let's face > it: directly or indirectly there is almost no network today > that is not connected to the Internet not even a plane in > flight. So saying that SLs can not be used in networks that > are connected to the Internet is the equivalent of killing them. > > Same as the other examples I used before: sensors/control > devices in a metropolitan water distribution system, or in a > power grid. SLs are a perfect choice for these, and somewhere > in that network there will likely be a host that has access > to the Internet as well. > > These topics have been discussed years ago, and I question > why we need to revisit this. > > Michel. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
