RE: [dtn-interest] FW: [IRSG] POLL: draft-irtf-dtnrg-arch-07 -- DUE30 Oct

"Henderson, Thomas R" <thomas.r.henderson@boeing.com> Thu, 09 November 2006 08:29 UTC

Received: from blv-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.32.69]) by webbie.berkeley.intel-research.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id kA98TtY20465 for <dtn-interest@mailman.dtnrg.org>; Thu, 9 Nov 2006 00:29:55 -0800
Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (slb-av-01.boeing.com [129.172.13.4]) by blv-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id kA98ThLF013644 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 9 Nov 2006 00:29:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id kA98TgZC008405; Thu, 9 Nov 2006 00:29:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwbh-11.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.55.84]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id kA98TX0t008225; Thu, 9 Nov 2006 00:29:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.55.44]) by XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 9 Nov 2006 00:29:41 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: RE: [dtn-interest] FW: [IRSG] POLL: draft-irtf-dtnrg-arch-07 -- DUE30 Oct
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 00:29:40 -0800
Message-ID: <77F357662F8BFA4CA7074B0410171B6D01A2F91C@XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <454D497F.4070301@jpl.nasa.gov>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [dtn-interest] FW: [IRSG] POLL: draft-irtf-dtnrg-arch-07 -- DUE30 Oct
Thread-Index: AccAgGnzv74gfyhcSnGMQdmdoNABbgDD4DTg
From: "Henderson, Thomas R" <thomas.r.henderson@boeing.com>
To: Scott Burleigh <Scott.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: dtn-interest@mailman.dtnrg.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Nov 2006 08:29:41.0266 (UTC) FILETIME=[33A61F20:01C703D9]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by webbie.berkeley.intel-research.net id kA98TtY20465
Sender: dtn-interest-admin@mailman.dtnrg.org
Errors-To: dtn-interest-admin@mailman.dtnrg.org
X-BeenThere: dtn-interest@mailman.dtnrg.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.dtnrg.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest>, <mailto:dtn-interest-request@mailman.dtnrg.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Delay Tolerant Networking Interest List <dtn-interest.mailman.dtnrg.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn-interest@mailman.dtnrg.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-interest-request@mailman.dtnrg.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.dtnrg.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest>, <mailto:dtn-interest-request@mailman.dtnrg.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.dtnrg.org/pipermail/dtn-interest/>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Burleigh [mailto:Scott.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov] 
> Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 6:17 PM
> To: Henderson, Thomas R
> Cc: dtn-interest@mailman.dtnrg.org
> Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] FW: [IRSG] POLL: 
> draft-irtf-dtnrg-arch-07 -- DUE30 Oct
> 
(snip)
> 
> My preference would be not to start all over again with 
> terminology wrangling.  One thing I would like to clarify: 
> bundle protocol EIDs are not addresses, because they do not 
> necessarily have any topological significance at all (unlike 
> the subnet number structure of IP addresses, the street 
> number structure of postal addresses, etc.).  You route on 
> them but nominally you do so only indirectly: EIDs are names 
> that you use to look up or infer (somehow) the topological 
> relationships you need to make routing decisions.

The DTN terminology seems to be related to the Nimrod (RFC1992)
terminology,
with a few differences.

In DTN, the endpoint defines a "region"; a set of DTN nodes.  In Nimrod,
a node denotes a "region"; a set of endpoints.  Nimrod EIDs do not span
multiple endpoints.  Maybe this might be clarified somehow.  It might be
worth a read of RFC1992 and describing the similarities and differences.

> 
> > It is not clear whether ADUs or bundles are passed to the DTN stack
> > across the service access point (SAP).  In 3.1 and 3.3.1, 
> it says that
> > applications send ADUs, but in other places, it describes 
> bundles being
> > the unit of data passed.  But it says in 3.1 that ADUs may 
> be fragmented
> > into bundles; who does this fragmentation?
> 
> It's only ADUs that are passed across the service access 
> point, and only ADUs are fragmented.  This may be a little 
> more explicit in the Bundle Protocol spec.
> 

OK, I think what confused me in this document is in 3.6.1, the
definition of
delivery options, where it appears that applications are seeing the
results
of bundle operations in the DTN (but they are passing ADUs and not
bundles);
e.g.:

   "- Report When Bundle Received - requests a Bundle Reception Status 
      Report be generated when the subject bundle arrives at a DTN node.
"

All of these services are defined in terms of bundles, while the
applications
are supposed to be dealing with ADUs.

Tom