IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dtn-interest] Question Regarding Custodial Transfer

Vint Cerf <vint@google.com> Fri, 13 July 2012 11:29 UTC

Return-Path: <vint@google.com>
X-Original-To: dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A79221F867D for <dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:29:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y9lxkiWIGISm for <dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-f54.google.com (mail-yw0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C0C21F86A8 for <dtn-interest@irtf.org>; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yhfs35 with SMTP id s35so4176843yhf.13 for <dtn-interest@irtf.org>; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; bh=990LdMw2eU4VgrgWinQ/oCMvD1cDad96PXuYx4o+rZY=; b=DOQs79sPsf4YXYM+qbz/AamnQf95mZzvsoV5UQwDiP+eZgMkMiJGQprRT0SwpyBIn2 lqBRjN1584rg3O/7W+Ulz27iA8pIjAf5C1qbKKs9bwF4Wbj8oDsxiwruoXMgFhBpizzR w7Wvv8ayWdtJZzWWYVV/3qqkg8A4ufO8npboMHp8Gmr3o3JzlqlXgJsou1A4fpsn/HnZ zoooSRrMrl7naaFxtk+qmZWqDMYG3N6O50Qd2QKzWLjY7+jmV5s/+tIcm4x6n/ZvH1Mk 6Wc5S+yOP7F+H1J8tEJRD6yCtJ5lNJDzh9fzSAcKVvgw6H8IPXzceIHRxBeom4/jixzo CbNg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=990LdMw2eU4VgrgWinQ/oCMvD1cDad96PXuYx4o+rZY=; b=CylAIKs0FbY9J9UVbs0dbdAj0lQ2tvo30P0XNUKq5f15Ph1XnpgoxfpsMm2Hk7FrcF doeGM0Toeqr71UrXSALOSUANokYPST+RHtXu/1HXlip1Es8hKTrs/gnYbep4q38hnM4G p3KEjZaqUz1Y5z7Xfz793qhM4/Fja6hiCmBheyRcF8CK3w3Wgn4v4FHyLUuTDloDnWi/ oJPDRNGNDPsxbgtg5LHgPtTEUlj0Q7w9K9YBfjMkM5XNfoaDtvP1nHw1YtRrEc4rWnN5 c0plf/Y+bX0OC+uVQln33nZ3X4qwKTgzAvblKVWFr/p6n4K5WG+bT0R4v3skxBEiia9m yMCA==
Received: by 10.50.180.138 with SMTP id do10mr596405igc.36.1342179013689; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.180.138 with SMTP id do10mr596394igc.36.1342179013577; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.57.16 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:30:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.57.16 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:30:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4FFFF4EF.70107@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <CAKovV0yaS7cjJ+JdEKs3SNpaX5FCp5-Oiss0aFpWG=R0BaYS1g@mail.gmail.com> <4FFEA38E.3010804@bbn.com> <42CAC1E3-7480-4C39-81C5-1E5504FEC8C5@nasa.gov> <CAKovV0zzvB8NR1TKR96GBvrLWvJBzed8nEvoz_mBaigD-P==2A@mail.gmail.com> <4FFFF4EF.70107@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 07:30:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHxHggdKe4iRj_j=H-=ssK84tFfuBUL2iLY8L4xwVSq7F1V0yA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vint Cerf <vint@google.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="14dae934060b544abc04c4b467f0"
X-System-Of-Record: true
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQma0xKR595UMlssdm9OjtuOxL1MSB6rEqjCEfkLvJrcqOr8wp3woR9b5wNY5i8V7I48iluJCnyozDYZhQ7aepnsrPnFEK0sC0QgW5wpIeqRqBp1mJadkPTmJ68m3L6WI/tYj0qWqfvmC4ZmPMQl4opRzKHFmdTXzLNo2jMpbPAw1tJkeRqdRV/4E+Zd2gVh/ZBxG/0p
Cc: dtn-interest <dtn-interest@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] Question Regarding Custodial Transfer
X-BeenThere: dtn-interest@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group \(DTNRG\) - Announce." <dtn-interest.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/dtn-interest>, <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn-interest>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn-interest@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest>, <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:29:39 -0000

Eric what about scheduling and antenna pointing? V
On Jul 13, 2012 6:14 AM, "Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
wrote:

>
>
> On 07/13/2012 05:52 AM, Eric Travis wrote:
> > Dan,
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > While BSP would be a non-starter (key management issues), including
> > something *similar to* a PIB (payload integrity block) wouldn't be
> > terrible; My hangup on such approach is that custody transfer can't be
> > predicated on the new custodian implementing (and thus validating) the
> > optional integrity check block. It would be better than nothing, until
> > it wasn't.
>
> There was a draft for that [1] but its not progressed and I don't
> know of any implementations. The basic idea is sound, though IMO
> without all the argumentative bits of the draft it'd much more
> likely to be implemented (and a lot shorter;-)
>
> S.
>
> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-dtnrg-bundle-checksum
>
> >
> > Oh well...
> >
> >
> > Will,
> >
> > For my scenario, time-sync would be a non-issue.
> >
> > The lifespan of the bundles would be to some ridiculous (14-28 days?)
> > value as they need to be considered valid until the problem is
> > resolved.  If the potential clock drift isn't insignificant compared
> > to such lifespans then the system is utterly doomed.
> >
> > Eric
> > _______________________________________________
> > dtn-interest mailing list
> > dtn-interest@irtf.org
> > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> dtn-interest mailing list
> dtn-interest@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email