Re: [cin] Aviation Networks

Terry Davis <terry.davis@ijetonboard.com> Fri, 13 July 2012 21:57 UTC

Received-SPF: pass (mail109-db3: domain of ijetonboard.com designates 157.56.241.101 as permitted sender) client-ip=157.56.241.101; envelope-from=terry.davis@ijetonboard.com; helo=BL2PRD0810HT001.namprd08.prod.outlook.com ; .outlook.com ;
From: Terry Davis <terry.davis@ijetonboard.com>
To: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, "cin@ietf.org" <cin@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Aviation Networks
Thread-Index: Ac1bkkTQElzaf7hFTCy3wRVGz7qMFQD31g2gAHNL0fA=
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 21:57:29 +0000
Message-ID: <C8092F050778464AB435B2AB453E73FF41E926C6@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <C8092F050778464AB435B2AB453E73FF41E8C1CB@CH1PRD0810MB360.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456D76FFA27A8@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
In-Reply-To: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456D76FFA27A8@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_C8092F050778464AB435B2AB453E73FF41E926C6BL2PRD0810MB349_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [cin] Aviation Networks
Precedence: list

Ron

Keeps in mind that the aviation network will have 140+ designers and operators (each nation-state member) and only high level architectural guidance from ICAO at the top.   SIPRNET is a highly controlled environment and as I recall it still depends on traffic filter access lists on the routers to control entry.?

I think we will have similar problems with a "policy" approach.

Look forward to the discussions in Vancouver.

Take care
Terry

From: Ronald Bonica [mailto:rbonica@juniper.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 7:39 AM
To: Terry Davis; cin@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Aviation Networks

Terry,

I am not sure that I agree with your first statement. Why couldn't you build a closed network using OTS gear that implements current IETF standards?  Are there not many examples of such networks (e.g., SIPRNET )?

The second problem is more interesting. The CIN might want to standardize a BGP policy with the following characteristics:


-          Enforces a globally agreed routing policy

-          Does not fail in a catastrophic way when one node/country does something that does not comply with policy

                                                                                            Ron


From: cin-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:cin-bounces@ietf.org> [mailto:cin-bounces@ietf.org]<mailto:[mailto:cin-bounces@ietf.org]> On Behalf Of Terry Davis
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 12:13 PM
To: cin@ietf.org<mailto:cin@ietf.org>
Subject: [cin] Aviation Networks


Two problems immediately come up with this path:

-          Current standards don't readily support the concept of closed or isolate networks.

-          And as any of you that operate large networks, especially globally with millions of nodes, know, they are always cross-wired somewhere.  And thus defining a scheme to protect the Internet BGP tables from disruption is going to be very challenging.  And don't forgot, there will not be a single network operator; most of the 140 nations will operate their own part of it.




This message and its attachments are the property of iJet Technologies, Inc. and are intended solely for the use of the designated recipient(s) and their appointed delegates. This email may contain information that is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from printing, copying, forwarding or saving any portion of the message or attachments. Please delete the message and attachments and notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your cooperation.

[cin] Aviation Networks Terry Davis
Re: [cin] Aviation Networks Ronald Bonica
Re: [cin] Aviation Networks Terry Davis